PID Controller Back Up

Laplace Transform
The Laplace transform is an integral transform perhaps second only to the Fourier
transform in its utility in solving physical problems. The Laplace transform is
particularly useful in solving linear ordinary differential equations such as those arising
in the analysis of electronic circuits.
The (unilateral) Laplace transform (not to be confused with the Lie derivative, also
commonly denoted ) is defined by
(1)
where:
is defined for (Abramowitz and Stegun 1972).

The unilateral Laplace transform is almost always what is meant by "the" Laplace
transform, although a bilateral Laplace transformm is sometimes also defined as :
(2)
(Oppenheim et al. 1997). The unilateral Laplace transform is implemented

in Mathematica as LaplaceTransform[f[t], t, s].
The inverse Laplace transform is known as the Bromwich integral, sometimes known
as the Fourier-Mellin integral (see also the related Duhamel's convolution principle).
A table of several important one-sided Laplace transforms is given below:
conditions
1
1
In the above table, is the zeroth-order Bessel function of the first kind, is
the delta function, and is the Heaviside step function.
The Laplace transform has many important properties. The Laplace transform
existence theorem states that, if is piecewise continuous on every finite interval in
satisfying
(3)
2
for all , then exists for all . The Laplace transform is also unique, in
the sense that, given two functions and with the same transform so that
(4)
then Lerch's theorem guarantees that the integral
(5)
vanishes for all for a null function defined by
(6)
The Laplace transform is linear since
(7)
(8)
(9)
The Laplace transform of a convolution is given by
(10)
(11)
Now consider differentiation. Let be continuously differentiable times in . If
, then
(12)
This can be proved by integration by parts,
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
Continuing for higher-order derivatives then gives
(19)
This property can be used to transform differential equations into algebraic equations,
a procedure known as the Heaviside calculus, which can then be inverse transformed
to obtain the solution. For example, applying the Laplace transform to the equation
(20)
gives
(21)
(22)
3
which can be rearranged to
(23)
If this equation can be inverse Laplace transformed, then the original differential
equation is solved.
The Laplace transform satisfied a number of useful properties. Consider
exponentiation. If for (i.e., is the Laplace transform of ), then
for . This follows from
(24)
(25)
(26)
The Laplace transform also has nice properties when applied to integrals of functions.
If is piecewise continuous and , then
(27)
Fourier Transform
The Fourier transform is a generalization of the complex Fourier series in the limit as . Re
the discrete with the continuous while letting . Then change the sum to an integr
the equations become
(1)
(2)
Here,
(3)
(4)
is called the forward ( ) Fourier transform, and
(5)
(6)
4
is called the inverse ( ) Fourier transform. The notation is introduced in Trott (2004, p
xxxiv), and and are sometimes also used to denote the Fourier transform and inverse F
transform, respectively (Krantz 1999, p. 202).
Note that some authors (especially physicists) prefer to write the transform in terms of angula
frequency instead of the oscillation frequency . However, this destroys the symmetry, r
in the transform pair
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
To restore the symmetry of the transforms, the convention
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
is sometimes used (Mathews and Walker 1970, p. 102).
In general, the Fourier transform pair may be defined using two arbitrary constants and as
(15)
(16)
The Fourier transform of a function is implemented as FourierTransform[f, x, k], and diff
choices of and can be used by passing the optional FourierParameters-> a, b option. By de
Mathematica takes FourierParameters as . Unfortunately, a number of other conventions
widespread use. For example, is used in modern physics, is used in pure mathematic
systems engineering, is used in probability theory for the computation of the characteristic
function, is used in classical physics, and is used in signal processing. In this work
following Bracewell (1999, pp. 6-7), it is always assumed that and unless otherwise
5
This choice often results in greatly simplified transforms of common functions such as 1,
etc.
Since any function can be split up into even and odd portions and ,
(17)
(18)
a Fourier transform can always be expressed in terms of the Fourier cosine transform and Fo
sine transform as
(19)
A function has a forward and inverse Fourier transform such that
(20)
provided that
1. exists.
2. There are a finite number of discontinuities.
3. The function has bounded variation. A sufficient weaker condition is fulfillment of the Lipsch
condition
(Ramirez 1985, p. 29). The smoother a function (i.e., the larger the number of continuous
derivatives), the more compact its Fourier transform.
The Fourier transform is linear, since if and have Fourier transforms and , then
Therefore,
6
The Fourier transform is also symmetric since implies:.
Let denote the convolution, then the transforms of convolutions of functions have particula
transforms,
The first of these is derived as follows:
where .
There is also a somewhat surprising and extremely important relationship between the
autocorrelation and the Fourier transform known as the Wiener-Khinchin theorem. Let
and denote the complex conjugate of , then the Fourier transform of the absolute square of
given by
The Fourier transform of a derivative of a function is simply related to the transform of t

function itself. Consider
Now use integration by parts
with
7
and
then
The first term consists of an oscillating function times . But if the function is bounded so tha
(as any physically significant signal must be), then the term vanishes, leaving
This process can be iterated for the th derivative to yield
The important modulation theorem of Fourier transforms allows to be expres

terms of as follows,
Since the derivative of the Fourier transform is given by
it follows that
8
Iterating gives the general formula
The variance of a Fourier transform is
and it is true that
If has the Fourier transform , then the Fourier transform has the shift propert
so has the Fourier transform
If has a Fourier transform , then the Fourier transform obeys a similarity

theorem.
so has the Fourier transform
The "equivalent width" of a Fourier transform is :
The "autocorrelation width" is
9
where denotes the cross-correlation of and and is the complex conjugate.
Any operation on which leaves its area unchanged leaves unchanged, since
The following table summarized some common Fourier transform pairs.

Function
Fourier transform--1 1
Fourier transform--cosine
Fourier transform--delta function
Fourier transform--exponential function
Fourier transform--Gaussian
Fourier transform--Heaviside step function

Fourier transform--inverse function
Fourier transform--Lorentzian function
Fourier transform--ramp function

Fourier transform--sine
In two dimensions, the Fourier transform becomes
Similarly, the -dimensional Fourier transform can be defined for , by
10
The (unilateral) -transform of a sequence is defined as
(1)
This definition is implemented in Mathematica as ZTransform[a, n, z]. Similarly, the

inverse -transform is implemented as InverseZTransform[A, z, n].
"The" -transform generally refers to the unilateral Z-transform. Unfortunately, there are
a number of other conventions. Bracewell (1999) uses the term " -transform" (with a
lower case ) to refer to the unilateral -transform. Girling (1987, p. 425) defines the
transform in terms of samples of a continuous function. Worse yet, some authors
define the -transform as the bilateral Z-transform.
In general, the inverse -transform of a sequence is not unique unless its region of
convergence is specified (Zwillinger 1996, p. 545). If the -transform of a function is
known analytically, the inverse -transform can be computed using the
contour integral
(2)
where is a closed contour surrounding the origin of the complex plane in the domain
of analyticity of (Zwillinger 1996, p. 545)
The unilateral transform is important in many applications because the generating
function of a sequence of numbers is given precisely by , the -
transform of in the variable (Germundsson 2000). In other words, the inverse -
transform of a function gives precisely the sequence of terms in the series
expansion of . So, for example, the terms of the series of are given by
(3)
Girling (1987) defines a variant of the unilateral -transform that operates on a
continuous function sampled at regular intervals ,
(4)
where is the Laplace transformm,
(5)
(6)
the one-sided shah function with period is given by
(7)
and is the Kronecker delta, giving
11
(8)
An alternative equivalent definition is
(9)
where
(10)
This definition is essentially equivalent to the usual one by taking .

The following table summarizes the -transforms for some common functions (Girling
1987, pp. 426-427; Bracewell 1999). Here, is the Kronecker delta, is the
Heaviside step function, and is the polylogarithm.
The -transform of the general power function can be computed analytically as

(11)
(12)
(13)
12
where the are Eulerian numbers and is a polylogarithm. Amazingly, the -
transforms of are therefore generators for Euler's number triangle.
The -transform satisfies a number of important properties, including
linearity
(14)
translation
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
scaling
(19)
and multiplication by powers of
(20)
(21)
(Girling 1987, p. 425; Zwillinger 1996, p. 544).
The discrete Fourier transform is a special case of the -transform with
(22)
and a -transform with
(23)
for is called a fractional Fourier transform.
The (unilateral) -transform of a sequence is defined as
(1)
This definition is implemented in Mathematica as ZTransform[a, n, z]. Similarly, the

inverse -transform is implemented as InverseZTransform[A, z, n].
"The" -transform generally refers to the unilateral Z-transform. Unfortunately, there are
a number of other conventions. Bracewell (1999) uses the term " -transform" (with a
lower case ) to refer to the unilateral -transform. Girling (1987, p. 425) defines the
transform in terms of samples of a continuous function. Worse yet, some authors
define the -transform as the bilateral Z-transform.
13
In general, the inverse -transform of a sequence is not unique unless its region of
convergence is specified (Zwillinger 1996, p. 545). If the -transform of a function is
known analytically, the inverse -transform can be computed using the
contour integral
(2)
where is a closed contour surrounding the origin of the complex plane in the domain
of analyticity of (Zwillinger 1996, p. 545)
The unilateral transform is important in many applications because the generating
function of a sequence of numbers is given precisely by , the -
transform of in the variable (Germundsson 2000). In other words, the inverse -
transform of a function gives precisely the sequence of terms in the series
expansion of . So, for example, the terms of the series of are given by
(3)
Girling (1987) defines a variant of the unilateral -transform that operates on a
continuous function sampled at regular intervals ,
(4)
where is the Laplace transformm,
(5)
(6)
the one-sided shah function with period is given by
(7)
and is the Kronecker delta, giving
(8)
An alternative equivalent definition is
(9)
where
(10)
This definition is essentially equivalent to the usual one by taking .
14
The following table summarizes the -transforms for some common functions (Girling
1987, pp. 426-427; Bracewell 1999). Here, is the Kronecker delta, is the
Heaviside step function, and is the polylogarithm.
The -transform of the general power function can be computed analytically as

(11)
(12)
(13)
where the are Eulerian numbers and is a polylogarithm. Amazingly, the -

transforms of are therefore generators for Euler's number triangle.
The -transform satisfies a number of important properties, including
linearity
(14)
translation
(15)
(16)
(17)
15
(18)
scaling
(19)
and multiplication by powers of
(20)
(21)
(Girling 1987, p. 425; Zwillinger 1996, p. 544).
The discrete Fourier transform is a special case of the -transform with
(22)
and a -transform with
(23)
for is called a fractional Fourier transform.
1. What is a PID Controller?

 A proportional–integral–derivative controller (PID controller) is a generic
control loop feedback mechanism (controller) widely used in industrial control
systems.
 A PID is the most commonly used feedback controller. A PID controller
calculates an "error" value as the difference between a measured process
16
variable and a desired setpoint. The controller attempts to minimize the error by
adjusting the process control inputs.
2. PID Controller Algorithm
The PID controller calculation (algorithm) involves three separate parameters, and is
accordingly sometimes called three-term control:
Proportional, P which depends on the present error;
Integral, I which depends on the accumulation of past errors;
Derivative, D which is a prediction of future errors, based on the current
rate of change.
The weighted sum of these three actions is used to adjust the process via a control
element such as the position of a control valve or the power supply of a heating
element.
In the absence of knowledge of the underlying process, a PID controller is the best
controller. By tuning the three constants in the PID controller algorithm, the controller
can provide control action designed for specific process requirements. The response of
the controller can be described in terms of the responsiveness of the controller to an
error, the degree to which the controller overshoots the setpoint and the degree of
system oscillation. Note that the use of the PID algorithm for control does not
guarantee optimal control of the system or system stability.
Some applications may require using only one or two modes to provide the appropriate
system control. This is achieved by setting the gain of undesired control outputs to
zero. A PID controller will be called a PI, PD, P or I controller in the absence of the
respective control actions. PI controllers are fairly common, since derivative action is
sensitive to measurement noise, whereas the absence of an integral value may
prevent the system from reaching its target value due to the control action.
3. PID Control loop basics

A familiar example of a control loop is the action taken when adjusting hot and cold
faucet valves to maintain the faucet water at the desired temperature. This typically
involves the mixing of two process streams, the hot and cold water. The person
touches the water to sense or measure its temperature. Based on this feedback they
perform a control action to adjust the hot and cold water valves until the process
temperature stabilizes at the desired value.
Sensing water temperature is analogous to taking a measurement of the process value
or process variable (PV). The desired temperature is called the setpoint (SP). The
input to the process (the water valve position) is called the manipulated variable (MV).
17
The difference between the temperature measurement and the setpoint is the error (e)
and quantifies whether the water is too hot or too cold and by how much.
After measuring the temperature (PV), and then calculating the error, the controller
decides when to change the tap position (MV) and by how much. When the controller
first turns the valve on, it may turn the hot valve only slightly if warm water is desired,
or it may open the valve all the way if very hot water is desired. This is an example of a
simple proportional control. In the event that hot water does not arrive quickly, the
controller may try to speed-up the process by opening up the hot water valve more-
and-more as time goes by. This is an example of an integral control.
Making a change that is too large when the error is small is equivalent to a high gain
controller and will lead to overshoot. If the controller were to repeatedly make changes
that were too large and repeatedly overshoot the target, the output would oscillate
around the setpoint in either a constant, growing, or decaying sinusoid. If the
oscillations increase with time then the system is unstable, whereas if they decrease
the system is stable. If the oscillations remain at a constant magnitude the system is
marginally stable.
In the interest of achieving a gradual convergence at the desired temperature (SP), the
controller may wish to damp the anticipated future oscillations. So in order to
compensate for this effect, the controller may elect to temper their adjustments. This
can be thought of as a derivative control method.
If a controller starts from a stable state at zero error (PV = SP), then further changes by
the controller will be in response to changes in other measured or unmeasured inputs
to the process that impact on the process, and hence on the PV. Variables that impact
on the process other than the MV are known as disturbances. Generally controllers are
used to reject disturbances and/or implement setpoint changes. Changes in feedwater
temperature constitute a disturbance to the faucet temperature control process.
In theory, a controller can be used to control any process which has a measurable
output (PV), a known ideal value for that output (SP) and an input to the process (MV)
that will affect the relevant PV. Controllers are used in industry to regulate temperature,
pressure, flow rate, chemical composition, speed and practically every other variable
for which a measurement exists.
4. PID controller theory

The PID control scheme is named after its three correcting terms, whose sum
constitutes the manipulated variable (MV). Hence:
where
18
Pout, Iout, and Dout are the contributions to the output from the PID controller from
each of the three terms, as defined below.
4a. The Proportional term
Plot of PV vs time, for three values of Kp (Ki and Kd held constant)

The proportional term (sometimes called gain) makes a change to the output that is
proportional to the current error value. The proportional response can be adjusted by
multiplying the error by a constant Kp, called the proportional gain.
The proportional term is given by:
where
Pout: Proportional term of output
Kp: Proportional gain, a tuning parameter
SP: Setpoint, the desired value
PV: Process value (or process variable), the measured value
e: Error = SP − PV
t: Time or instantaneous time (the present)
A high proportional gain results in a large change in the output for a given change in
the error. If the proportional gain is too high, the system can become unstable (see the
section on loop tuning). In contrast, a small gain results in a small output response to
a large input error, and a less responsive (or sensitive) controller. If the proportional
gain is too low, the control action may be too small when responding to system
disturbances.
19
Droop
A pure proportional controller will not always settle at its target value, but may retain a
steady-state error. Specifically, the process gain - drift in the absence of control, such
as cooling of a furnace towards room temperature, biases a pure proportional
controller. If the process gain is down, as in cooling, then the bias will be below the set
point, hence the term "droop".
Droop is proportional to process gain and inversely proportional to proportional gain.
Specifically the steady-state error is given by:
e = G / Kp
Droop is an inherent defect of purely proportional control. Droop may be mitigated by
adding a compensating bias term (setting the setpoint above the true desired value), or
corrected by adding an integration term (in a PI or PID controller), which effectively
computes a bias adaptively.
Despite droop, both tuning theory and industrial practice indicate that it is the
proportional term that should contribute the bulk of the output change.
4b. The Integral term
Plot of PV vs time, for three values of Ki (Kp and Kd held constant)

The contribution from the integral term (sometimes called reset) is proportional to both
the magnitude of the error and the duration of the error. Summing the instantaneous
error over time (integrating the error) gives the accumulated offset that should have
been corrected previously. The accumulated error is then multiplied by the integral gain
and added to the controller output. The magnitude of the contribution of the integral
term to the overall control action is determined by the integral gain, Ki.
20
The integral term is given by:
where
Iout: Integral term of output
Ki: Integral gain, a tuning parameter
τ: a dummy integration variable
The integral term (when added to the proportional term) accelerates the movement of
the process towards setpoint and eliminates the residual steady-state error that occurs
with a proportional only controller. However, since the integral term is responding to
accumulated errors from the past, it can cause the present value to overshoot the
setpoint value (cross over the setpoint and then create a deviation in the other
direction). For further notes regarding integral gain tuning and controller stability ( see
loop tuning).
4c. The Derivative term
Plot of PV vs time, for three values of Kd (Kp and Ki held constant)

The rate of change of the process error is calculated by determining the slope of the
error over time (i.e., its first derivative with respect to time) and multiplying this rate of
change by the derivative gain Kd. The magnitude of the contribution of the derivative
term (sometimes called rate) to the overall control action is termed the derivative gain,
Kd. The derivative term is given by:
21
where
Dout: Derivative term of output
Kd: Derivative gain, a tuning parameter
The derivative term slows the rate of change of the controller output and this effect is
most noticeable close to the controller setpoint. Hence, derivative control is used to
reduce the magnitude of the overshoot produced by the integral component and
improve the combined controller-process stability. However, differentiation of a signal
amplifies noise and thus this term in the controller is highly sensitive to noise in the
error term, and can cause a process to become unstable if the noise and the derivative
gain are sufficiently large. Hence an approximation to a differentiator with a limited
bandwidth is more commonly used. Such a circuit is known as a Phase-Lead
compensator.
4d. Summary
The proportional, integral, and derivative terms are summed to calculate the output of
the PID controller. Defining u(t) as the controller output, the final form of the PID
algorithm is:
where the tuning parameters are:
Proportional gain, Kp
Larger values typically mean faster response since the larger the error, the larger
the proportional term compensation. An excessively large proportional gain will
lead to process instability and oscillation.
Integral gain, Ki
Larger values imply steady state errors are eliminated more quickly. The trade-off
is larger overshoot: any negative error integrated during transient response must
be integrated away by positive error before reaching steady state.
Derivative gain, Kd
Larger values decrease overshoot, but slow down transient response and may
lead to instability due to signal noise amplification in the differentiation of the
error.
22
5. Loop tuning
Tuning a control loop is the adjustment of its control parameters (gain/proportional
band, integral gain/reset, derivative gain/rate) to the optimum values for the desired
control response. Stability (bounded oscillation) is a basic requirement, but beyond
that, different systems have different behavior, different applications have different
requirements, and requirements may conflict with one another.
Some processes have a degree of non-linearity and so parameters that work well at
full-load conditions don't work when the process is starting up from no-load; this can be
corrected by gain scheduling (using different parameters in different operating regions).
PID controllers often provide acceptable control using default tunings, but performance
can generally be improved by careful tuning, and performance may be unacceptable
with poor tuning.
PID tuning is a difficult problem, even though there are only three parameters and in
principle is simple to describe, because it must satisfy complex criteria within the
limitations of PID control. There are accordingly various methods for loop tuning, and
more sophisticated techniques are the subject of patents; this section describes some
traditional manual methods for loop tuning.
5a. Stability
If the PID controller parameters (the gains of the proportional, integral and derivative
terms) are chosen incorrectly, the controlled process input can be unstable, i.e. its
output diverges, with or without oscillation, and is limited only by saturation or
mechanical breakage. Instability is caused by excess gain, particularly in the presence
of significant lag.
Generally, stability of response (the reverse of instability) is required and the process
must not oscillate for any combination of process conditions and setpoints, though
sometimes marginal stability (bounded oscillation) is acceptable or desired.
5b. Optimum behavior

The optimum behavior on a process change or setpoint change varies depending on
the application.
Two basic requirements are regulation (disturbance rejection – staying at a given
setpoint) and command tracking (implementing setpoint changes) – these refer to how
well the controlled variable tracks the desired value. Specific criteria for command
tracking include rise time and settling time. Some processes must not allow an
overshoot of the process variable beyond the setpoint if, for example, this would be
unsafe. Other processes must minimize the energy expended in reaching a new
setpoint.
23
5c. Overview of methods
There are several methods for tuning a PID loop. The most effective methods generally
involve the development of some form of process model, then choosing P, I, and D
based on the dynamic model parameters. Manual tuning methods can be relatively
inefficient, particularly if the loops have response times on the order of minutes or
longer.
The choice of method will depend largely on whether or not the loop can be taken
"offline" for tuning, and the response time of the system. If the system can be taken
offline, the best tuning method often involves subjecting the system to a step change in
input, measuring the output as a function of time, and using this response to determine
the control parameters.
Choosing a Tuning Method
Method Advantages Disadvantages
Manual Requires experienced
No math required. Online method.
Tuning personnel.
Process upset, some trial-
Ziegler–
Proven Method. Online method. and-error, very aggressive
Nichols
tuning.
Consistent tuning. Online or offline method. May
Software include valve and sensor analysis. Allow Some cost and training
Tools simulation before downloading. Can support involved.
Non-Steady State (NSS) Tuning.
Some math. Offline
Cohen-
Good process models. method. Only good for
Coon
first-order processes.
5d. Manual tuning

If the system must remain online, one tuning method is to first set Ki and Kd values to
zero. Increase the Kp until the output of the loop oscillates, then the Kp should be set to
approximately half of that value for a "quarter amplitude decay" type response. Then
increase Ki until any offset is correct in sufficient time for the process. However, too
much Ki will cause instability. Finally, increase Kd, if required, until the loop is
acceptably quick to reach its reference after a load disturbance. However, too much Kd
will cause excessive response and overshoot. A fast PID loop tuning usually
overshoots slightly to reach the setpoint more quickly; however, some systems cannot
accept overshoot, in which case an over-damped closed-loop system is required,
which will require a Kp setting significantly less than half that of the Kp setting causing
oscillation.
24
Effects of increasing a parameter independently
Settling Steady-state
Parameter Rise time Overshoot Stability
time error
Small
Kp Decrease Increase Decrease Degrade
change
Decrease
Ki Decrease Increase Increase Degrade
significantly
Minor Minor Minor Improve if Kd
Kd No effect in theory
decrease decrease decrease small
5e. Ziegler–Nichols method

Another heuristic tuning method is formally known as the Ziegler–Nichols method,
introduced by John G. Ziegler and Nathaniel B. Nichols in the 1940s. As in the
method above, the Ki and Kd gains are first set to zero. The P gain is increased until it
reaches the ultimate gain, Ku, at which the output of the loop starts to oscillate. Ku and
the oscillation period Pu are used to set the gains as shown:
Ziegler–Nichols method
Control Type Kp Ki Kd
P 0.50Ku - -
PI 0.45Ku 1.2Kp / Pu -
PID 0.60Ku 2Kp / Pu KpPu / 8
These gains apply to the ideal, parallel form of the PID controller. When applied to the
standard PID form, the integral and derivative time parameters Ti and Td are only
dependent on the oscillation period Pu.
5f. PID tuning software

Most modern industrial facilities no longer tune loops using the manual calculation
methods shown above. Instead, PID tuning and loop optimization software are used to
ensure consistent results. These software packages will gather the data, develop
25
process models, and suggest optimal tuning. Some software packages can even
develop tuning by gathering data from reference changes.
Mathematical PID loop tuning induces an impulse in the system, and then uses the
controlled system's frequency response to design the PID loop values. In loops with
response times of several minutes, mathematical loop tuning is recommended,
because trial and error can literally take days just to find a stable set of loop values.
Optimal values are harder to find. Some digital loop controllers offer a self-tuning
feature in which very small setpoint changes are sent to the process, allowing the
controller itself to calculate optimal tuning values.
Other formulas are available to tune the loop according to different performance
criteria. Many patented formulas are now embedded within PID tuning software and
hardware modules.
Advances in automated PID Loop Tuning software also deliver algorithms for tuning
PID Loops in a dynamic or Non-Steady State (NSS) scenario. The software will model
the dynamics of a process, through a disturbance, and calculate PID control
parameters in response.
6. Modifications to the PID algorithm

The basic PID algorithm presents some challenges in control applications that have
been addressed by minor modifications to the PID form.
6a. Integral windup

One common problem resulting from the ideal PID implementations is integral windup,
where a large change in setpoint occurs (say a positive change) and the integral term
accumulates a significant error during the rise (windup), thus overshooting and
continuing to increase as this accumulated error is unwound. This problem can be
addressed by:
• Initializing the controller integral to a desired value
• Increasing the setpoint in a suitable ramp
• Disabling the integral function until the PV has entered the controllable region
• Limiting the time period over which the integral error is calculated
• Preventing the integral term from accumulating above or below pre-determined
bounds
6b. Freezing the integral function in case of disturbances
26
If a PID loop is used to control the temperature of an electric resistance furnace,
the system has stabilized and then the door is opened and something cold is put
into the furnace the temperature drops below the setpoint. The integral function
of the controller tends to compensate this error by introducing another error in the
positive direction. This can be avoided by freezing of the integral function after
the opening of the door for the time the control loop typically needs to reheat the
furnace.
6c. Replacing the integral function by a model based part

Often the time-response of the system is approximately known. Then it is an
advantage to simulate this time-response with a model and to calculate some
unknown parameter from the actual response of the system. If for instance the
system is an electrical furnace the response of the difference between furnace
temperature and ambient temperature to changes of the electrical power will be
similar to that of a simple RC low-pass filter multiplied by an unknown
proportional coefficient. The actual electrical power supplied to the furnace is
delayed by a low-pass filter to simulate the response of the temperature of the
furnace and then the actual temperature minus the ambient temperature is
divided by this low-pass filtered electrical power. Then, the result is stabilized by
another low-pass filter leading to an estimation of the proportional coefficient.
With this estimation, it is possible to calculate the required electrical power by
dividing the set-point of the temperature minus the ambient temperature by this
coefficient. The result can then be used instead of the integral function. This also
achieves a control error of zero in the steady-state, but avoids integral windup
and can give a significantly improved control action compared to an optimized
PID controller. This type of controller does work properly in an open loop
situation which causes integral windup with an integral function. This is an
advantage if, for example, the heating of a furnace has to be reduced for some
time because of the failure of a heating element, or if the controller is used as an
advisory system to a human operator who may not switch it to closed-loop
operation. It may also be useful if the controller is inside a branch of a complex
control system that may be temporarily inactive.
Many PID loops control a mechanical device (for example, a valve). Mechanical
maintenance can be a major cost and wear leads to control degradation in the form of
either stiction or a deadband in the mechanical response to an input signal. The rate of
mechanical wear is mainly a function of how often a device is activated to make a
change. Where wear is a significant concern, the PID loop may have an output
deadband to reduce the frequency of activation of the output (valve). This is
accomplished by modifying the controller to hold its output steady if the change would
be small (within the defined deadband range). The calculated output must leave the
deadband before the actual output will change.
The proportional and derivative terms can produce excessive movement in the output
when a system is subjected to an instantaneous step increase in the error, such as a
27
large setpoint change. In the case of the derivative term, this is due to taking the
derivative of the error, which is very large in the case of an instantaneous step change.
As a result, some PID algorithms incorporate the following modifications:
6d. Derivative of output
In this case the PID controller measures the derivative of the output quantity,
rather than the derivative of the error. The output is always continuous (i.e.,
never has a step change). For this to be effective, the derivative of the output
must have the same sign as the derivative of the error.
6e. Setpoint ramping

In this modification, the setpoint is gradually moved from its old value to a newly
specified value using a linear or first order differential ramp function. This avoids
the discontinuity present in a simple step change.
6f. Setpoint weighting

Setpoint weighting uses different multipliers for the error depending on which
element of the controller it is used in. The error in the integral term must be the
true control error to avoid steady-state control errors. This affects the controller's
setpoint response. These parameters do not affect the response to load
disturbances and measurement noise.
7. History
PID controllers date to 1890s governor design. PID controllers were subsequently
developed in automatic ship steering. One of the earliest examples of a PID-type
controller was developed by Elmer Sperry in 1911, while the first published theoretical
analysis of a PID controller was by Russian American engineer Nicolas Minorsky, in
(Minorsky 1922). Minorsky was designing automatic steering systems for the US Navy,
and based his analysis on observations of a helmsman, observing that the helmsman
controlled the ship not only based on the current error, but also on past error and
current rate of change; this was then made mathematical by Minorsky. His goal was
stability, not general control, which significantly simplified the problem. While
proportional control provides stability against small disturbances, it was insufficient for
dealing with a steady disturbance, notably a stiff gale (due to droop), which required
adding the integral term. Finally, the derivative term was added to improve control.
Trials were carried out on the USS New Mexico, with the controller controlling the
angular velocity (not angle) of the rudder. PI control yielded sustained yaw (angular
error) of ±2°, while adding D yielded yaw of ±1/6°, better than most helmsmen could
achieve.
The Navy ultimately did not adopt the system, due to resistance by personnel. Similar
work was carried out and published by several others in the 1930s.
28
8. Limitations of PID control
While PID controllers are applicable to many control problems, and often perform
satisfactorily without any improvements or even tuning, they can perform poorly in
some applications, and do not in general provide optimal control. The fundamental
difficulty with PID control is that it is a feedback system, with constant parameters, and
no direct knowledge of the process, and thus overall performance is reactive and a
compromise – while PID control is the best controller with no model of the process,
better performance can be obtained by incorporating a model of the process.
The most significant improvement is to incorporate feed-forward control with
knowledge about the system, and using the PID only to control error. Alternatively,
PIDs can be modified in more minor ways, such as by changing the parameters (either
gain scheduling in different use cases or adaptively modifying them based on
performance), improving measurement (higher sampling rate, precision, and accuracy,
and low-pass filtering if necessary), or cascading multiple PID controllers.
PID controllers, when used alone, can give poor performance when the PID loop gains
must be reduced so that the control system does not overshoot, oscillate or hunt about
the control setpoint value. They also have difficulties in the presence of non-linearities,
may trade off regulation versus response time, do not react to changing process
behavior (say, the process changes after it has warmed up), and have lag in
responding to large disturbances.
8a. Linearity
Another problem faced with PID controllers is that they are linear, and in particular
symmetric. Thus, performance of PID controllers in non-linear systems (such as HVAC
systems) is variable. For example, in temperature control, a common use case is active
heating (via a heating element) but passive cooling (heating off, but no cooling), so
overshoot can only be corrected slowly – it cannot be forced downward. In this case
the PID should be tuned to be overdamped, to prevent or reduce overshoot, though
this reduces performance (it increases settling time).
8b. Noise in derivative

A problem with the derivative term is that small amounts of measurement or process
noise can cause large amounts of change in the output. It is often helpful to filter the
measurements with a low-pass filter in order to remove higher-frequency noise
components. However, low-pass filtering and derivative control can cancel each other
out, so reducing noise by instrumentation means is a much better choice. Alternatively,
a nonlinear median filter may be used, which improves the filtering efficiency and
practical performance. In some case, the differential band can be turned off in many
29
systems with little loss of control. This is equivalent to using the PID controller as a PI
controller.
9. Improvements
9a. Feed-forward
The control system performance can be improved by combining the feedback (or
closed-loop) control of a PID controller with feed-forward (or open-loop) control.
Knowledge about the system (such as the desired acceleration and inertia) can be fed
forward and combined with the PID output to improve the overall system performance.
The feed-forward value alone can often provide the major portion of the controller
output. The PID controller can be used primarily to respond to whatever difference or
error remains between the setpoint (SP) and the actual value of the process variable
(PV). Since the feed-forward output is not affected by the process feedback, it can
never cause the control system to oscillate, thus improving the system response and
stability.
For example, in most motion control systems, in order to accelerate a mechanical load
under control, more force or torque is required from the prime mover, motor, or
actuator. If a velocity loop PID controller is being used to control the speed of the load
and command the force or torque being applied by the prime mover, then it is
beneficial to take the instantaneous acceleration desired for the load, scale that value
appropriately and add it to the output of the PID velocity loop controller. This means
that whenever the load is being accelerated or decelerated, a proportional amount of
force is commanded from the prime mover regardless of the feedback value. The PID
loop in this situation uses the feedback information to change the combined output to
reduce the remaining difference between the process setpoint and the feedback value.
Working together, the combined open-loop feed-forward controller and closed-loop PID
controller can provide a more responsive, stable and reliable control system.
9b. Other improvements

In addition to feed-forward, PID controllers are often enhanced through methods such
as PID gain scheduling (changing parameters in different operating conditions), fuzzy
logic or computational verb logic. Further practical application issues can arise from
instrumentation connected to the controller. A high enough sampling rate,
measurement precision, and measurement accuracy are required to achieve adequate
control performance.
10. Cascade control
30
One distinctive advantage of PID controllers is that two PID controllers can be used
together to yield better dynamic performance. This is called cascaded PID control. In
cascade control there are two PIDs arranged with one PID controlling the set point of
another. A PID controller acts as outer loop controller, which controls the primary
physical parameter, such as fluid level or velocity. The other controller acts as inner
loop controller, which reads the output of outer loop controller as set point, usually
controlling a more rapid changing parameter, flowrate or acceleration. It can be
mathematically proven that the working frequency of the controller is increased and the
time constant of the object is reduced by using cascaded PID controller.
11. Physical implementation of PID control

In the early history of automatic process control the PID controller was implemented as
a mechanical device. These mechanical controllers used a lever, spring and a mass
and were often energized by compressed air. These pneumatic controllers were once
the industry standard.
Electronic analog controllers can be made from a solid-state or tube amplifier, a
capacitor and a resistance. Electronic analog PID control loops were often found within
more complex electronic systems, for example, the head positioning of a disk drive, the
power conditioning of a power supply, or even the movement-detection circuit of a
modern seismometer. Nowadays, electronic controllers have largely been replaced by
digital controllers implemented with microcontrollers.
Most modern PID controllers in industry are implemented in programmable logic
controllers (PLCs) or as a panel-mounted digital controller. Software implementations
have the advantages that they are relatively cheap and are flexible with respect to the
implementation of the PID algorithm.
Variable voltages may be applied by the time proportioning form of Pulse-width
modulation (PWM) – a cycle time is fixed, and variation is achieved by varying the
proportion of the time during this cycle that the controller outputs +1 (or −1) instead of
0. On a digital system the possible proportions are discrete – e.g., increments of .1
second within a 2 second cycle time yields 20 possible steps: percentage increments
of 5% – so there is a discretization error, but for high enough time resolution this yields
satisfactory performance.
12. Alternative nomenclature and PID forms:
12a. Ideal versus standard PID form

The form of the PID controller most often encountered in industry, and the one most
relevant to tuning algorithms is the standard form. In this form the Kp gain is applied to
the Iout, and Dout terms, yielding:
31
where
Ti is the integral time
Td is the derivative time
In this standard form, the parameters have a clear physical meaning. In particular, the
inner summation produces a new single error value which is compensated for future
and past errors. The addition of the proportional and derivative components effectively
predicts the error value at Td seconds (or samples) in the future, assuming that the loop
control remains unchanged. The integral component adjusts the error value to
compensate for the sum of all past errors, with the intention of completely eliminating
them in Ti seconds (or samples). The resulting compensated single error value is
scaled by the single gain Kp.
In the ideal parallel form, shown in the controller theory section
the gain parameters are related to the parameters of the standard form through
and . This parallel form, where the parameters are treated as

simple gains, is the most general and flexible form. However, it is also the form where
the parameters have the least physical interpretation and is generally reserved for
theoretical treatment of the PID controller. The standard form, despite being slightly
more complex mathematically, is more common in industry.
12b. Laplace form of the PID controller

Sometimes it is useful to write the PID regulator in Laplace transform form:
Having the PID controller written in Laplace form and having the transfer function of the
controlled system makes it easy to determine the closed-loop transfer function of the
system.
12c. PID Pole Zero Cancellation

The PID equation can be written in this form:
When this form is used it is easy to determine the closed loop transfer function.
32
If
Then
This can be very useful to remove unstable poles
12d. Series/interacting form

Another representation of the PID controller is the series, or interacting form
where the parameters are related to the parameters of the standard form through
, , and
with
.
This form essentially consists of a PD and PI controller in series, and it made early
(analog) controllers easier to build. When the controllers later became digital, many
kept using the interacting form.
12e. Discrete implementation

The analysis for designing a digital implementation of a PID controller in a
Microcontroller (MCU) or FPGA device requires the standard form of the PID controller
to be discretised. Approximations for first-order derivatives are made by backward
finite differences. The integral term is discretised, with a sampling time Δt,as follows,
33
The derivative term is approximated as,
Thus, a velocity algorithm for implementation of the discretised PID controller in a MCU
is obtained by differentiating u(t), using the numerical definitions of the first and second
derivative and solving for u(tk) and finally obtaining:
Pseudocode
Here is a simple software loop that implements the PID algorithm in its 'ideal, parallel'
form:
previous_error = 0
integral = 0
start:
error = setpoint - actual_position
integral = integral + (error*dt)
derivative = (error - previous_error)/dt
output = (Kp*error) + (Ki*integral) + (Kd*derivative)
previous_error = error
wait(dt)
goto start
13. PI controller
Basic block of a PI controller.
A PI Controller (proportional-integral controller) is a special case of the PID controller

in which the derivative (D) of the error is not used.
The controller output is given by
34
where Δ is the error or deviation of actual measured value (PV) from the set-point (SP).
Δ = SP - PV.
A PI controller can be modelled easily in software such as Simulink using a "flow chart"
box involving Laplace operators:
where:
G = KP = proportional gain
G / τ = KI = integral gain
Setting a value for G is often a trade off between decreasing overshoot and increasing
settling time.
The lack of derivative action may make the system more steady in the steady state in
the case of noisy data. This is because derivative action is more sensitive to higher-
frequency terms in the inputs.
Without derivative action, a PI-controlled system is less responsive to real (non-noise)
and relatively fast alterations in state and so the system will be slower to reach setpoint
and slower to respond to perturbations than a well-tuned PID system may be.
Introduction
The illustration below shows the characteristics of each: the proportional (P), the
integral (I), and the derivative (D) controls, and how to use them to obtain a desired
response.Consider the following unity feedback system:
Plant: A system to be controlled

Controller: Provides the excitation for the plant; Designed to control the overall system
behavior
14. The three-term controller

The transfer function of the PID controller looks like the following:
35
• Kp = Proportional gain
• KI = Integral gain
• Kd = Derivative gain
First, let's take a look at how the PID controller works in a closed-loop system using the
schematic shown above. The variable (e) represents the tracking error, the difference
between the desired input value (R) and the actual output (Y). This error signal (e) will
be sent to the PID controller, and the controller computes both the derivative and the
integral of this error signal. The signal (u) just past the controller is now equal to the
proportional gain (Kp) times the magnitude of the error plus the integral gain (Ki) times
the integral of the error plus the derivative gain (Kd) times the derivative of the error.
This signal (u) will be sent to the plant, and the new output (Y) will be obtained. This
new output (Y) will be sent back to the sensor again to find the new error signal (e).
The controller takes this new error signal and computes its derivative and its integral
again. This process goes on and on.
15. The characteristics of P, I, and D controllers

A proportional controller (Kp) will have the effect of reducing the rise time and will
reduce ,but never eliminate, the steady-state error. An integral control (Ki) will have the
effect of eliminating the steady-state error, but it may make the transient response
worse. A derivative control (Kd) will have the effect of increasing the stability of the
system, reducing the overshoot, and improving the transient response. Effects of each
of controllers Kp, Kd, and Ki on a closed-loop system are summarized in the table
shown below.
CL RESPONSE RISE TIME OVERSHOOT SETTLING TIME S-S ERROR
Kp Decrease Increase Small Change Decrease
Ki Decrease Increase Increase Eliminate
Kd Small Change Decrease Decrease Small Change
Note that these correlations may not be exactly accurate, because Kp, Ki, and Kd are
dependent of each other. In fact, changing one of these variables can change the
effect of the other two. For this reason, the table should only be used as a reference
when you are determining the values for Ki, Kp and Kd.
16. Modeling Tutorial
36
Matlab can be used to represent a physical system or a model. To begin with, let's start
with a review of how to represent a physical system as a set of differential equations.
16a. Train system

In this example, consider a toy train consisting of an engine and a car. Assuming that
the train only travels in one direction, we want to apply control to the train so that it has
a smooth start-up and stop, along with a constant-speed ride.
The mass of the engine and the car will be represented by M1 and M2, respectively.
The two are held together by a spring, which has the stiffness coefficient of k. F
represents the force applied by the engine, and the Greek letter, mu (which will also be
represented by the letter u), represents the coefficient of rolling friction.
Free body diagram and Newton's law

The system can be represented by following Free Body Diagrams.
From Newton's law, we know that the sum of forces acting on a mass equals the mass
times its acceleration. In this case, the forces acting on M1 are the spring, the friction
and the force applied by the engine. The forces acting on M2 are the spring and the
friction. In the vertical direction, the gravitational force is cancelled by the normal force
applied by the ground, so that there will be no acceleration in the vertical direction. The
equations of motion in the horizontal direction are the followings:
State-variable and output equations

This set of system equations can now be manipulated into state-variable form.
Knowing state-variables are X1 and X2 and the input is F, state-variable equations will
look like the following:
37
Let the output of the system be the velocity of the engine. Then the output equation will
become:
1. Transfer function
To find the transfer function of the system, first, take Laplace transforms of above
state-variable and output equations.
Using these equations, derive the transfer function Y(s)/F(s) in terms of constants.
Note: When finding the transfer function, zero initial conditions must be
assumed.
The transfer function should look like the one shown below.
2. State-space
Another method to solve the problem is to use the state-space form. Four matrices A,
B, C, and D characterize the system behavior, and will be used to solve the problem.
The state-space forms that were manipulated from the state-variable and the output
equations is shown below.
38
Matlab representation
Now we will show you how to enter the equations derived above into an m-file for
Matlab. Since Matlab can not manipulate symbolic variables, let's assign numerical
values to each of the variables. Let
• M1 = 1 kg
• M2 = 0.5 kg
• k = 1 N/sec
• F= 1 N
• u = 0.002 sec/m
• g = 9.8 m/s^2
Create a new m-file and enter the following commands:
M1=1;
M2=0.5;
k=1;
F=1;
u=0.002;
g=9.8;
Now you have one of two choices:
1) Use the transfer function, or
2) Use the state-space form to solve the problem.
If you choose to use the transfer function, add the following commands onto the end of
the m-file which you have just created:
39
num=[M2 M2*u*g 1];
den=[M1*M2 2*M1*M2*u*g M1*k+M1*M2*u*u*g*g+M2*k M1*k*u*g+M2*k*u*g];
If you choose to use the state-space form, add the following commands at the end of
the m-file, instead of num and den matrices shown above:
A=[ 0 1 0 0;
-k/M1 -u*g k/M1 0;
0 0 0 1;
k/M2 0 -k/M2 -u*g];
B=[ 0;
1/M1;
0;
0];
C=[0 1 0 0];
D=[0];
Note: See the Matlab basics tutorial to learn more about entering matrices.
Continue solving the problem

Now, you are ready to obtain the system output (with an addition of few more
commands). It should be noted that many operations can be done using either the
transfer function or the state-space model. Furthermore, it is simple to transfer between
the two if the other form of representation is required
16b. Root Locus Tutorial

Key Matlab commands used in this tutorial: cloop, rlocfind, rlocus, sgrid, step
Matlab commands from the control system toolbox are highlighted in red.
Closed-Loop Poles
The root locus of an (open-loop) transfer function H(s) is a plot of the locations (locus)
of all possible closed loop poles with proportional gain k and unity feedback:
The closed-loop transfer function is:
40
and thus the poles of the closed loop system are values of s such that 1 + K H(s) = 0.
If we write H(s) = b(s)/a(s), then this equation has the form:
Let n = order of a(s) and m = order of b(s) [the order of a polynomial is the highest
power of s that appears in it].
Consider all positive values of k. In the limit as k -> 0, the poles of the closed-loop
system are a(s) = 0 or the poles of H(s). In the limit as k -> infinity, the poles of the
closed-loop system are b(s) = 0 or the zeros of H(s).
No matter what we pick k to be, the closed-loop system must always have n poles,
where n is the number of poles of H(s). The root locus must have n branches, each
branch starts at a pole of H(s) and goes to a zero of H(s). If H(s) has more poles than
zeros (as is often the case), m < n and we say that H(s) has zeros at infinity. In this
case, the limit of H(s) as s -> infinity is zero. The number of zeros at infinity is n-m, the
number of poles minus the number of zeros, and is the number of branches of the root
locus that go to infinity (asymptotes).
Since the root locus is actually the locations of all possible closed loop poles, from the
root locus we can select a gain such that our closed-loop system will perform the way
we want. If any of the selected poles are on the right half plane, the closed-loop system
will be unstable. The poles that are closest to the imaginary axis have the greatest
influence on the closed-loop response, so even though the system has three or four
poles, it may still act like a second or even first order system depending on the
location(s) of the dominant pole(s).
Plotting the root locus of a transfer function

Consider an open loop system which has a transfer function of
To design a feed-back controller for the system by using the root locus method, say
design criteria are 5% overshoot and 1 second rise time, make a Matlab file called rl.m.
Enter the transfer function, and the command to plot the root locus:
41
num=[1 7];
den=conv(conv([1 0],[1 5]),conv([1 15],[1 20]));
rlocus(num,den)
axis([-22 3 -15 15])
Choosing a value of K from the root locus

The plot above shows all possible closed-loop pole locations for a pure proportional
controller. Obviously not all of those closed-loop poles will satisfy our design criteria.
To determine what part of the locus is acceptable, we can use the command
sgrid(Zeta,Wn) to plot lines of constant damping ratio and natural frequency. Its two
arguments are the damping ratio (Zeta) and natural frequency (Wn) [these may be
vectors if you want to look at a range of acceptable values]. In our problem, we need
an overshoot less than 5% (which means a damping ratio Zeta of greater than 0.7) and
a rise time of 1 second (which means a natural frequency Wn greater than 1.8). Enter
in the Matlab command window:
zeta=0.7;
Wn=1.8;
sgrid(zeta, Wn)
42
On the plot above, the two white dotted lines at about a 45 degree angle indicate pole
locations with Zeta = 0.7; in between these lines, the poles will have Zeta > 0.7 and
outside of the lines Zeta < 0.7. The semicircle indicates pole locations with a natural
frequency Wn = 1.8; inside the circle, Wn < 1.8 and outside the circle Wn > 1.8.
Going back to our problem, to make the overshoot less than 5%, the poles have to be
in between the two white dotted lines, and to make the rise time shorter than 1 second,
the poles have to be outside of the white dotted semicircle. So now we know only the
part of the locus outside of the semicircle and in between the two lines are acceptable.
All the poles in this location are in the left-half plane, so the closed-loop system will be
stable.
From the plot above we see that there is part of the root locus inside the desired
region. So in this case we need only a proportional controller to move the poles to the
desired region. You can use rlocfind command in Matlab to choose the desired poles
on the locus:
[kd,poles] = rlocfind(num,den)
Click on the plot the point where you want the closed-loop pole to be. You may want to
select the points indicated in the plot below to satisfy the design criteria.
Note that since the root locus may has more than one branch, when you select a pole,
you may want to find out where the other pole (poles) are. Remember they will affect
the response too. From the plot above we see that all the poles selected (all the white
"+") are at reasonable positions. We can go ahead and use the chosen kd as our
proportional controller.
43
Closed-loop response
In order to find the step response, you need to know the closed-loop transfer function.
You could compute this using the rules of block diagrams, or let Matlab do it for you:
[numCL, denCL] = cloop((kd)*num, den)
The two arguments to the function cloop are the numerator and denominator of the
open-loop system. You need to include the proportional gain that you have chosen.
Unity feedback is assumed.
If you have a non-unity feedback situation, look at the help file for the Matlab
function feedback, which can find the closed-loop transfer function with a gain in
the feedback loop.
Check out the step response of your closed-loop system:
step(numCL,denCL)
As we expected, this response has an overshoot less than 5% and a rise time less
than 1 second.
16c. State Space Tutorial

State-space equations
Control design using pole placement
Introducing the reference input
Observer design
Key Matlab commands used in this tutorial: acker, lsim, place, plot, rscale
Non-standard Matlab commands used in this tutorial are highlighted in green.
44
There are several different ways to describe a system of linear differential equations.
The state-space representation is given by the equations:
where x is an n by 1 vector representing the state (commonly position and velocity

variables in mechanical systems), u is a scalar representing the input (commonly a
force or torque in mechanical systems), and y is a scalar representing the output. The
matrices A (n by n), B (n by 1), and C (1 by n) determine the relationships between the
state and input and output variables. Note that there are n first-order differential
equations. State space representation can also be used for systems with multiple
inputs and outputs (MIMO), but we will only use single-input, single-output (SISO)
systems in these tutorials.
To introduce the state space design method, we will use the
magnetically suspended ball as an example. The current
through the coils induces a magnetic force which can
balance the force of gravity and cause the ball (which is
made of a magnetic material) to be suspended in midair.
The modeling of this system has been established in many
control text books (including Automatic Control Systems by
B. C. Kuo, the seventh edition). The equations for the
system are given by:
where h is the vertical position of the ball, i is the current through the electromagnet, V
is the applied voltage, M is the mass of the ball, g is gravity, L is the inductance, R is
the resistance, and K is a coefficient that determines the magnetic force exerted on the
ball. For simplicity, we will choose values M = 0.05 Kg, K = 0.0001, L = 0.01 H, R = 1
Ohm, g = 9.81 m/sec^2 . The system is at equilibrium (the ball is suspended in midair)
whenever h = K i^2/Mg (at which point dh/dt = 0). We linearize the equations about the
point h = 0.01 m (where the nominal current is about 7 amp) and get the state space
equations:
45
where:
is the set of state variables for the system (a 3x1 vector), u is the input voltage
(delta V), and y (the output), is delta h. Enter the system matrices into a m-file.
A=[ 0 1 0
980 0 -2.8
0 0 -100];
B = [0
0
100];
C = [1 0 0];
One of the first things you want to do with the state equations is find the poles of the
system; these are the values of s where det(sI - A) = 0, or the eigenvalues of the A
matrix:
poles = eig(A)
You should get the following three poles:
poles =
31.3050
-31.3050
-100.0000
One of the poles is in the right-half plane, which means that the system is unstable in
open-loop.
To check out what happens to this unstable system when there is a nonzero initial
condition, add the following lines to your m-file,
t = 0:0.01:2;
u = 0*t;
x0 = [0.005 0 0];
[y,x] = lsim(A,B,C,0,u,t,x0);
h = x(:,2); %Delta-h is the output of interest
plot(t,h)
and run the file again.
46
It looks like the distance between the ball and the electromagnet will go to infinity, but
probably the ball hits the table or the floor first (and also probably goes out of the range
where our linearization is valid).

Let's build a controller for this system. The schematic of a full-state feedback system is
the following:
Recall that the characteristic polynomial for this closed-loop system is the determinant
of (sI-(A-BK)). Since the matrices A and B*K are both 3 by 3 matrices, there will be 3
poles for the system. By using full-state feedback we can place the poles anywhere we
want. We could use the Matlab function place to find the control matrix, K, which will
give the desired poles.
Before attempting this method, we have to decide where we want the closed-loop
poles to be. Suppose the criteria for the controller were settling time < 0.5 sec and
overshoot < 5%, then we might try to place the two dominant poles at -10 +/- 10i (at
zeta = 0.7 or 45 degrees with sigma = 10 > 4.6*2). The third pole we might place at -50
to start, and we can change it later depending on what the closed-loop behavior is.
Remove the lsim command from your m-file and everything after it, then add the
following lines to your m-file,
47
p1 = -10 + 10i;
p2 = -10 - 10i;
p3 = -50;
K = place(A,B,[p1 p2 p3]);
lsim(A-B*K,B,C,0,u,t,x0);
The overshoot is too large (there are also zeros in the transfer function which can
increase the overshoot; you do not see the zeros in the state-space formulation). Try
placing the poles further to the left to see if the transient response improves (this
should also make the response faster).
p1 = -20 + 20i;
p2 = -20 - 20i;
p3 = -100;
48
This time the overshoot is smaller. Consult your textbook for further suggestions on
choosing the desired closed-loop poles.
Compare the control effort required (K) in both cases. In general, the farther you move
the poles, the more control effort it takes.
Note: If you want to place two or more poles at the same position, place will not work.
You can use a function called acker which works similarly to place:
K = acker(A,B,[p1 p2 p3])
Now, we will take the control system as defined above and apply a step input (we
choose a small value for the step, so we remain in the region where our linearization is
valid). Replace t,u and lsim in your m-file with the following,
t = 0:0.01:2;
u = 0.001*ones(size(t));
lsim(A-B*K,B,C,0,u,t)
The system does not track the step well at all; not only is the magnitude not one, but it
is negative instead of positive!
Recall the schematic above, we don't compare the output to the reference; instead we
measure all the states, multiply by the gain vector K, and then subtract this result from
the reference. There is no reason to expect that K*x will be equal to the desired output.
To eliminate this problem, we can scale the reference input to make it equal to
K*x_steadystate. This scale factor is often called Nbar; it is introduced as shown in the
following schematic:
49
We can get Nbar from Matlab by using the function rscale (place the following line of
code after K = ...).
Nbar=rscale(A,B,C,0,K)
Note that this function is not standard in Matlab. You will need to copy it to a new m-file
to use it. Now, if we want to find the response of the system under state feedback with
this introduction of the reference, we simply note the fact that the input is multiplied by
this new factor, Nbar:
lsim(A-B*K,B*Nbar,C,0,u,t)
and now a step can be tracked reasonably well.
Observer design
When we can't measure all the states x (as is commonly the case), we can build an
observer to estimate them, while measuring only the output y = C x. For the magnetic
ball example, we will add three new, estimated states to the system. The schematic is
as follows:
50
The observer is basically a copy of the plant; it has the same input and almost the
same differential equation. An extra term compares the actual measured output y to
the estimated output ; this will cause the estimated states to approach the values
of the actual states x. The error dynamics of the observer are given by the poles of (A-
L*C).
First we need to choose the observer gain L. Since we want the dynamics of the
observer to be much faster than the system itself, we need to place the poles at least
five times farther to the left than the dominant poles of the system. If we want to use
place, we need to put the three observer poles at different locations.
op1 = -100;
op2 = -101;
op3 = -102;
Because of the duality between controllability and observability, we can use the same
technique used to find the control matrix, but replacing the matrix B by the matrix C and
taking the transposes of each matrix (consult your text book for the derivation):
L = place(A',C',[op1 op2 op3])';
The equations in the block diagram above are given for . It is conventional to write
the combined equations for the system plus observer using the original state x plus the
error state: e = x - . We use as state feedback u = -K . After a little bit of algebra
(consult your textbook for more details), we arrive at the combined state and error
equations with the full-state feedback and an observer:
At = [A - B*K B*K
zeros(size(A)) A - L*C];
Bt = [ B*Nbar
zeros(size(B))];
Ct = [ C zeros(size(C))];
To see how the response looks to a nonzero initial condition with no reference input,
add the following lines into your m-file. We typically assume that the observer begins
with zero initial condition, =0. This gives us that the initial condition for the error is
equal to the initial condition of the state.
lsim(At,Bt,Ct,0,zeros(size(t)),t,[x0 x0])
51
Responses of all the states are plotted below. Recall that lsim gives us x and e; to get
we need to compute x-e.
Zoom in to see some detail:
52
The blue solid line is the response of the ball position , the blue dotted line is the
estimated state ;
The green solid line is the response of the ball speed , the green dotted line is the
estimated state ;
The red solid line is the response of the current , the red dotted line is the estimated
state .
We can see that the observer estimates the states quickly and tracks the states
reasonably well in the steady-state.
The plot above can be obtained by using the plo command.
16d. Digital Control Tutorial

Key Matlab Commands used in this tutorial are: c2dm pzmap zgrid dstep stairs rlocus
Note: Matlab commands from the control system toolbox are highlighted in red.
Introduction
The figure below shows the typical continuous feedback system that we have been
considering so far in this tutorial. Almost all of the continuous controllers can be built
using analog electronics.
53
The continuous controller, enclosed in the dashed square, can be replaced by a digital
controller, shown below, that performs same control task as the continuous controller.
The basic difference between these controllers is that the digital system operates on
discrete signals (or samples of the sensed signal) rather than on continuous signals.
Different types of signals in the above digital schematic can be represented by the
following plots.
54
The purpose of this Digital Control Tutorial is to show you how to work with discrete
functions either in transfer function or state-space form to design digital control
systems.
Zero-order hold equivalence
In the above schematic of the digital control system, we see that the digital control
system contains both discrete and the continuous portions. When designing a digital
control system, we need to find the discrete equivalent of the continuous portion so
that we only need to deal with discrete functions.
For this technique, we will consider the following portion of the digital control system
and rearrange as follows.
The clock connected to the D/A and A/D converters supplies a pulse every T
seconds and each D/A and A/D sends a signal only when the pulse arrives. The
purpose of having this pulse is to require that Hzoh(z) have only samples u(k) to work
on and produce only samples of output y(k); thus, Hzoh(z) can be realized as a
discrete function.
The philosophy of the design is the following. We want to find a discrete function
Hzoh(z) so that for a piecewise constant input to the continuous system H(s), the
sampled output of the continuous system equals the discrete output. Suppose the
signal u(k) represents a sample of the input signal. There are techniques for taking this
sample u(k) and holding it to produce a continuous signal uhat(t). The sketch below
shows that the uhat(t) is held constant at u(k) over the interval kT to (k+1)T. This
operation of holding uhat(t) constant over the sampling time is called zero-order hold.
55
The zero-order held signal uhat(t) goes through H2(s) and A/D to produce the output
y(k) that will be the piecewise same signal as if the continuous u(t) goes through H(s)
to produce the continuous output y(t).
Now we will redraw the schematic, placing Hzoh(z) in place of the continuous portion.
By placing Hzoh(z), we can design digital control systems dealing with only discrete
functions.
Note: There are certain cases where the discrete response does not match the
continuous response due to a hold circuit implemented in digital control systems. For
information, see Lagging effect associated with the hold.
56
Conversion using c2dm
There is a Matlab function called c2dm that converts a given continuous system (either
in transfer function or state-space form) to discrete system using the zero-order hold
operation explained above. The basic command for this c2dm is one of the following.
[numDz,denDz] = c2dm (num,den,Ts,'zoh')

[F,G,H,J] = c2dm (A,B,C,D,Ts,'zoh')
The sampling time (Ts in sec/sample) should be smaller than 1/(30*BW), where BW is
the closed-loop bandwidth frequency.
Suppose you have the following continuous transfer function
• M = 1 kg
• b = 10 N.s/m
• k = 20 N/m
• F(s) = 1
Assuming the closed-loop bandwidth frequency is greater than 1 rad/sec, we will
choose the sampling time (Ts) equal to 1/100 sec. Now, create an new m-file and enter
the following commands.
M=1;
b=10;
k=20;
num=[1];
den=[M b k];
Ts=1/100;
[numDz,denDz]=c2dm(num,den,Ts,'zoh')
Running this m-file in the command window should give you the following numDz and
denDz matrices.
numDz =
1.0e-04 *
0 0.4837 0.4678
denDz =
1.0000 -1.9029 0.9048
57
From these matrices, the discrete transfer function can be written as
Note: The numerator and denominator matrices will be represented by the descending
powers of z. For more information on Matlab representation, please refer to Matlab
representation.
Now you have the transfer function in discrete form.
2. State-Space
Suppose you have the following continuous state-space model
All constants are same as before

The following m-file converts the above continuous state-space to discrete state-space.
M=1;
b=10;
k=20;
A=[0 1;
-k/M -b/M];
B=[ 0;
1/M];
C=[1 0];
D=[0];
Ts=1/100;
[F,G,H,J] = c2dm (A,B,C,D,Ts,'zoh')
58
Create a new m-file and copy the above commands. Running this m-file in the Matlab
command window should give you the following matrices.
F=
0.9990 0.0095
-0.1903 0.9039
G=
0.0000
0.0095
H=
1 0
J=
0
From these matrices, the discrete state-space can be written as
Now you have the discrete time state-space model.
Note: For more information on the discrete state-space, please refer to Discrete State-
Space.
Stability and transient response

For continuous systems, we know that certain behaviors results from different pole
locations in the s-plane. For instance, a system is unstable when any pole is located to
the right of the imaginary axis. For discrete systems, we can analyze the system
behaviors from different pole locations in the z-plane. The characteristics in the z-plane
can be related to those in the s-plane by the expression:
• T = Sampling time (sec/sample)

• s = Location in the s-plane
• z = Location in the z-plane
59
The figure below shows the mapping of lines of constant damping ratio (zeta) and
natural frequency (Wn) from the s-plane to the z-plane using the expression shown
above.
If you noticed in the z-plane, the stability boundary is no longer imaginary axis, but is
the unit circle |z|=1. The system is stable when all poles are located inside the unit
circle and unstable when any pole is located outside.
For analyzing the transient response from pole locations in the z-plane, the following
three equations used in continuous system designs are still applicable.
where:
• zeta = Damping ratio
• Wn = Natural frequency (rad/sec)
• Ts = Settling time
• Tr = Rise time
• Mp = Maximum overshoot
Important: The natural frequency (Wn) in z-plane has the unit of rad/sample, but
when you use the equations shown above, the Wn must be in the unit of rad/sec.
Suppose we have the following discrete transfer function
60
Create an new m-file and enter the following commands. Running this m-file in the
command window gives you the following plot with the lines of constant damping ratio
and natural frequency.
numDz=[1];
denDz=[1 -0.3 0.5];
pzmap(numDz,denDz)
axis([-1 1 -1 1])
zgrid
From this plot, we see poles are located approximately at the natural frequency of
9pi/20T (rad/sample) and the damping ratio of 0.25. Assuming that we have the
sampling time of 1/20 sec (which leads to Wn = 28.2 rad/sec) and using three
equations shown above, we can determine that this system should have the rise time
of 0.06 sec, the settling time of 0.65 sec and the maximum overshoot of 45% (0.45
more than the steady-state value). Let's obtain the step response and see if these are
correct. Add the following commands to the above m-file and rerun it in the command
window. You should get the following step response.
[x] = dstep (numDz,denDz,51);

t = 0:0.05:2.5;
stairs (t,x)
61
As you can see from the plot, all of the rise time, the settling time and the overshoot
came out to be what we expected. We proved you here that we can use the locations
of poles and the above three equations to analyze the transient response of the
system.
For more analysis on the pole locations and transient response, see Transient
Response.
Discrete Root-Locus
The root-locus is the locus of points where roots of characteristic equation can be
found as a single gain is varied from zero to infinity. The characteristic equation of an
unity feedback system is
where G(z) is the compensator implemented in the digital controller and Hzoh(z) is the
plant transfer function in z.
The mechanics of drawing the root-loci are exactly the same in the z-plane as in the s-
plane. Recall from the continuous Root-Locus Tutorial, we used the Matlab function
called sgrid to find the root-locus region that gives the right gain (K). For the discrete
root-locus analysis, we use the function zgrid that has the same characteristics as the
sgrid. The command zgrid(zeta, Wn) draws lines of constant damping ratio (zeta) and
natural frequency (Wn).
Suppose we have the following discrete transfer function
and the requirements of having damping ratio greater than 0.6 and the natural
frequency greater than 0.4 rad/sample (these can be found from design requirements,
sampling time (sec/sample) and three equations shown in the previous section). The
62
following commands draws the root-locus with the lines of constant damping ratio and
natural frequency. Create an new m-file and enter the following commands. Running
this m-file should give you the following root-locus plot.
numDz=[1 -0.3];
denDz=[1 -1.6 0.7];
rlocus (numDz,denDz)
axis ([-1 1 -1 1])
zeta=0.4;
Wn=0.3;
zgrid (zeta,Wn)
From this plot, you should realize that the system is stable because all poles are
located inside the unit circle. Also, you see two dotted lines of constant damping ratio
and natural frequency. The natural frequency is greater than 0.3 outside the constant-
Wn line, and the damping ratio is greater than 0.4 inside the constant-zeta line. In this
example, we do have the root-locus drawn in the desired region. Therefore, a gain (K)
chosen from one of the loci in the desired region should give you the response that
satisfies design requirements.
A resistive transducer is a device that senses a change to cause a change in
resistance. Transducers do NOT generate electricity. Examples include:
Device Action Where used
Light Dependent Resistance falls with increasing Light operated switches

Resistor light level
Thermistor Resistance falls with increased Electronic thermometers

temperature
Strain gauge Resistance changes with force Sensor in an electronic

balance
Moisture detector Resistance falls when wet Damp meter
63
These are called passive devices. (Active transducers do generate electricity from
other energy sources, or have a power supply.)
Light Dependent Resistors
The light dependent resistor consists of a length of material (cadmium sulphide)

whose resistance changes according to the light level. Therefore, the brighter the
light, the lower the resistance.
We can show the way the resistance varies with light level as a graph:
The first graph shows us the variation using a linear scale. The graph on the right
shows the plot as a logarithmic plot, which comes up as a straight line. Logarithmic
plots are useful for compressing scales.
LDRs are used for:

• Smoke detection
• Automatic lighting
• Counting
• Alarm systems.
64
Resistive components can get hot when excessive current is flowing through them, and
this can impair their function, or damage them. This can be prevented by connecting a
current limiting resistor in series, as shown in the picture below.
Thermistors
The most common type of thermistor that we use has a resistance that falls as the
temperature rises. It is referred to as a negative temperature coefficient device. A
positive temperature coefficient device has a resistance that increases with
temperature.
The graph of resistance against temperature is like this.
The resistance on this graph is on a logarithmic scale, as there is a large range of

values.
The LDR is most commonly used in a potential divider circuit.
65
Potential Divider
• Although it is simple, the potential divider is a very useful circuit. In its simplest
form it is two resistors in series with an input voltage Vs across the ends.
• An output voltage Vout is obtained from a junction between the two resistors.
The potential divider circuit looks like this:
You need to learn this equation. It is very useful.
This result can be thought of as the output voltage being the same fraction of the input
voltage as R2 is the fraction of the total resistance. Look at this circuit for the next
example:
66
Capacitive Transducers
AC instrumentation transducers
Just as devices have been made to measure certain physical quantities and repeat
that information in the form of DC electrical signals (thermocouples, strain gauges, pH
probes, etc.), special devices have been made that do the same with AC.
It is often necessary to be able to detect and transmit the physical position of
mechanical parts via electrical signals. This is especially true in the fields of automated
machine tool control and robotics. A simple and easy way to do this is with a
potentiometer as shown below.
Potentiometer tap voltage indicates position of an object slaved to the shaft.

However, potentiometers have their own unique problems. For one, they rely on
physical contact between the “wiper” and the resistance strip, which means they suffer
the effects of physical wear over time. As potentiometers wear, their proportional
output versus shaft position becomes less and less certain. You might have already
experienced this effect when adjusting the volume control on an old radio: when
twisting the knob, you might hear “scratching” sounds coming out of the speakers.
Those noises are the result of poor wiper contact in the volume control potentiometer.
Also, this physical contact between wiper and strip creates the possibility of arcing
(sparking) between the two as the wiper is moved. With most potentiometer circuits,
the current is so low that wiper arcing is negligible, but it is a possibility to be
considered. If the potentiometer is to be operated in an environment where
combustible vapor or dust is present, this potential for arcing translates into a potential
for an explosion!
Using AC instead of DC, we are able to completely avoid sliding contact between parts
if we use a variable transformer instead of a potentiometer. Devices made for this
purpose are called LVDT's, which stands for Linear Variable Differential Transformers.
The design of an LVDT looks like this: (Figure below)
67
AC output of linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) indicates core position.
Obviously, this device is a transformer: it has a single primary winding powered by an
external source of AC voltage, and two secondary windings connected in series-
bucking fashion. It is variable because the core is free to move between the windings.
It is differential because of the way the two secondary windings are connected. Being
arranged to oppose each other (180o out of phase) means that the output of this device
will be the difference between the voltage output of the two secondary windings. When
the core is centered and both windings are outputting the same voltage, the net result
at the output terminals will be zero volts. It is called linear because the core's freedom
of motion is straight-line.
The AC voltage output by an LVDT indicates the position of the movable core. Zero
volts means that the core is centered. The further away the core is from center
position, the greater percentage of input (“excitation”) voltage will be seen at the
output. The phase of the output voltage relative to the excitation voltage indicates
which direction from center the core is offset.
The primary advantage of an LVDT over a potentiometer for position sensing is the
absence of physical contact between the moving and stationary parts. The core does
not contact the wire windings, but slides in and out within a nonconducting tube. Thus,
the LVDT does not “wear” like a potentiometer, nor is there the possibility of creating
an arc.
Excitation of the LVDT is typically 10 volts RMS or less, at frequencies ranging from
power line to the high audio (20 kHz) range. One potential disadvantage of the LVDT is
its response time, which is mostly dependent on the frequency of the AC voltage
source. If very quick response times are desired, the frequency must be higher to allow
whatever voltage-sensing circuits enough cycles of AC to determine voltage level as
the core is moved. To illustrate the potential problem here, imagine this exaggerated
scenario: an LVDT powered by a 60 Hz voltage source, with the core being moved in
and out hundreds of times per second. The output of this LVDT wouldn't even look like
a sine wave because the core would be moved throughout its range of motion before
68
the AC source voltage could complete a single cycle! It would be almost impossible to
determine instantaneous core position if it moves faster than the instantaneous source
voltage does.
A variation on the LVDT is the RVDT, or Rotary Variable Differential Transformer. This
device works on almost the same principle, except that the core revolves on a shaft
instead of moving in a straight line. RVDT's can be constructed for limited motion of
360o (full-circle) motion.
Continuing with this principle, we have what is known as a Synchro or Selsyn, which is
a device constructed a lot like a wound-rotor polyphase AC motor or generator. The
rotor is free to revolve a full 360o, just like a motor. On the rotor is a single winding
connected to a source of AC voltage, much like the primary winding of an LVDT. The
stator windings are usually in the form of a three-phase Y, although synchros with more
than three phases have been built. (Figure below) A device with a two-phase stator is
known as a resolver. A resolver produces sine and cosine outputs which indicate shaft
position.
A synchro is wound with a three-phase stator winding, and a rotating field. A resolver
has a two-phase stator.
Voltages induced in the stator windings from the rotor's AC excitation are not phase-
shifted by 120o as in a real three-phase generator. If the rotor were energized with DC
current rather than AC and the shaft spun continuously, then the voltages would be
true three-phase. But this is not how a synchro is designed to be operated. Rather, this
is a position-sensing device much like an RVDT, except that its output signal is much
more definite. With the rotor energized by AC, the stator winding voltages will be
proportional in magnitude to the angular position of the rotor, phase either 0o or 180o
shifted, like a regular LVDT or RVDT. You could think of it as a transformer with one
primary winding and three secondary windings, each secondary winding oriented at a
unique angle. As the rotor is slowly turned, each winding in turn will line up directly with
69
the rotor, producing full voltage, while the other windings will produce something less
than full voltage.
Synchros are often used in pairs. With their rotors connected in parallel and energized
by the same AC voltage source, their shafts will match position to a high degree of
accuracy: (Figure below)
Synchro shafts are slaved to each other. Rotating one moves the other.
Such “transmitter/receiver” pairs have been used on ships to relay rudder position, or
to relay navigational gyro position over fairly long distances. The only difference
between the “transmitter” and the “receiver” is which one gets turned by an outside
force. The “receiver” can just as easily be used as the “transmitter” by forcing its shaft
to turn and letting the synchro on the left match position.
If the receiver's rotor is left unpowered, it will act as a position-error detector,
generating an AC voltage at the rotor if the shaft is anything other than 90o or 270o
shifted from the shaft position of the transmitter. The receiver rotor will no longer
generate any torque and consequently will no longer automatically match position with
the transmitter's: (Figure below)
70
AC voltmeter registers voltage if the receiver rotor is not rotated exactly 90 or 270
degrees from the transmitter rotor.
This can be thought of almost as a sort of bridge circuit that achieves balance only if
the receiver shaft is brought to one of two (matching) positions with the transmitter
shaft.
One rather ingenious application of the synchro is in the creation of a phase-shifting
device, provided that the stator is energized by three-phase AC: (Figure below)
Full rotation of the rotor will smoothly shift the phase from 0o all the way to 360o (back
to 0o).
As the synchro's rotor is turned, the rotor coil will progressively align with each stator
coil, their respective magnetic fields being 120o phase-shifted from one another. In
between those positions, these phase-shifted fields will mix to produce a rotor voltage
somewhere between 0o, 120o, or 240o shift. The practical result is a device capable of
providing an infinitely variable-phase AC voltage with the twist of a knob (attached to
the rotor shaft).
A synchro or a resolver may measure linear motion if geared with a rack and pinion
mechanism. A linear movement of a few inches (or cm) resulting in multiple revolutions
of the synchro (resolver) generates a train of sinewaves. An Inductosyn® is a linear
version of the resolver. It outputs signals like a resolver; though, it bears slight
resemblance.
The Inductosyn consists of two parts: a fixed serpentine winding having a 0.1 in or 2
mm pitch, and a movable winding known as a slider. (Figure below) The slider has a
pair of windings having the same pitch as the fixed winding. The slider windings are
offset by a quarter pitch so both sine and cosine waves are produced by movement.
One slider winding is adequate for counting pulses, but provides no direction
information. The 2-phase windings provide direction information in the phasing of the
sine and cosine waves. Movement by one pitch produces a cycle of sine and cosine
waves; multiple pitches produce a train of waves.
71
Inductosyn: (a) Fixed serpentine winding, (b) movable slider 2-phase windings.
17. Modeling Examples.
17a. Example1. Modeling a Cruise Control System
This is a simple example of the

modeling and control of a first order
system. This model takes inertia and
damping into account, and simple
controllers are designed. This modeling
example includes:
1. Physical setup and system
equations
2. Design requirements
3. Matlab representation
4. Open-loop response
5. Closed-loop transfer function
Physical setup and system equations

The model of the cruise control system is relatively simple. If the inertia of the wheels is
neglected, and it is assumed that friction (which is proportional to the car's speed) is
what is opposing the motion of the car, then the problem is reduced to the simple mass
and damper system shown below.
72
Using Newton's law, modelling equations for this system becomes:
(1)
where u is the force from the engine. For this example, let's assume that
m = 1000kg
b = 50Nsec/m
u = 500N
Design requirements
The next step in modelling this system is to come up with some design criteria. When
the engine gives a 500 Newton force, the car will reach a maximum velocity of 10 m/s
(22 mph). An automobile should be able to accelerate up to that speed in less than 5
seconds. Since this is only a cruise control system, a 10% overshoot on the velocity
will not do much damage. A 2% steady-state error is also acceptable for the same
reason.
Keeping the above in mind, we have proposed the following design criteria for this
problem:
Rise time < 5 sec
Overshoot < 10%
Steady state error < 2%
3. Matlab representation
3.1. Transfer Function

To find the transfer function of the above system, we need to take the Laplace
transform of the modelling equations (1). When finding the transfer function, zero
initial conditions must be assumed. Laplace transforms of the two equations are
shown below.
73
Since our output is the velocity, let's substitute V(s) in terms of Y(s)
The transfer function of the system becomes
To solve this problem using Matlab, copy the following commands into an new m-file:
m=1000;
b=50;
u=500;
num=[1];
den=[m b];
These commands will later be used to find the open-loop response of the system to a
step input. But before getting into that, let's take a look at another representation, the
state-space.
3.2. State-Space
We can rewrite the first-order modelling equation (1) as the state-space model.
To use Matlab to solve this problem, create an new m-file and copy the following
commands:
m = 1000;
b = 50;
u = 500;
A = [-b/m];
B = [1/m];
C = [1];
D = 0;
Note: It is possible to convert from the state-space representation to the transfer
function or vise versa using Matlab.
Open-loop response
Now let's see how the open-loop system responds to a step input. Add the following
command onto the end of the m-file written for the transfer function (the m-file with num
and den matrices) and run it in the Matlab command window:
step (u*num,den)
74
You should get the following plot:
To use the m-file written for the state-space (the m-file with A, B, C, D matrices), add
the following command at the end of the m-file and run it in the Matlab command
window:
step (A,u*B,C,D)
You should get the same plot as the one shown above.
From the plot, we see that the vehicle takes more than 100 seconds to reach the
steady-state speed of 10 m/s. This does not satisfy our rise time criterion of less than 5
seconds.
Closed-loop transfer function

To solve this problem, a unity feedback controller will be added to improve the system
performance. The figure shown below is the block diagram of a typical unity feedback
system.
The transfer function in the plant is the transfer function derived above
{Y(s)/U(s)=1/ms+b}. The controller will to be designed to satisfy all design criteria. Four
different methods to design the controller are listed at the bottom of this page. You may
choose on PID, Root-locus, Frequency response, or State-space.
Illustrative Application:
Suppose we have a simple mass, spring, and damper problem.
75
The modelling equation of this system is
(1)
Taking the Laplace transform of the modelling equation (1)
The transfer function between the displacement X(s) and the input F(s) then becomes
Let
• M = 1kg
• b = 10 N.s/m
• k = 20 N/m
• F(s) = 1
Plug these values into the above transfer function
The goal of this problem is to show you how each of Kp, Ki and Kd contributes to
obtain
• Fast rise time
• Minimum overshoot
• No steady-state error
Open-loop step response
Let's first view the open-loop step response. Create a new m-file and add in the
following code:
num=1;
den=[1 10 20];
step(num,den)
Running this m-file in the Matlab command window should give you the plot shown
below.
76
The DC gain of the plant transfer function is 1/20, so 0.05 is the final value of the
output to an unit step input. This corresponds to the steady-state error of 0.95, quite
large indeed. Furthermore, the rise time is about one second, and the settling time is
about 1.5 seconds. Let's design a controller that will reduce the rise time, reduce the
settling time, and eliminates the steady-state error.
Proportional control
From the table shown above, we see that the proportional controller (Kp) reduces the
rise time, increases the overshoot, and reduces the steady-state error. The closed-loop
transfer function of the above system with a proportional controller is:
Let the proportional gain (Kp) equals 300 and change the m-file to the following:
Kp=300;
num=[Kp];
den=[1 10 20+Kp];
t=0:0.01:2;
step(num,den,t)
Running this m-file in the Matlab command window gives you the following plot.
77
Note: The Matlab function called cloop can be used to obtain a closed-loop transfer
function directly from the open-loop transfer function (instead of obtaining closed-loop
transfer function by hand). The following m-file uses the cloop command that should
give you the identical plot as the one shown above.
num=1;
den=[1 10 20];
Kp=300;
[numCL,denCL]=cloop(Kp*num,den);
t=0:0.01:2;
step(numCL, denCL,t)
The above plot shows that the proportional controller reduced both the rise time and
the steady-state error, increased the overshoot, and decreased the settling time by
small amount.
Proportional-Derivative control
From the table shown above, we see that the derivative controller (Kd) reduces both
the overshoot and the settling time. The closed-loop transfer function of the given
system with a PD controller is:
Let Kp equals to 300 as before and let Kd equals 10. Enter the following commands
into an m-file and run it in the Matlab command window.
Kp=300;
Kd=10;
78
num=[Kd Kp];
den=[1 10+Kd 20+Kp];
t=0:0.01:2;
step(num,den,t)
This plot shows that the derivative controller reduced both the overshoot and the
settling time, and had small effect on the rise time and the steady-state error.
Proportional-Integral control
Before going into a PID control, let's take a look at a PI control. From the table, we see
that an integral controller (Ki) decreases the rise time, increases both the overshoot
and the settling time, and eliminates the steady-state error. For the given system, the
closed-loop transfer function with a PI control is:
Let's reduce the Kp to 30, and let Ki equals to 70. Create an new m-file and enter the
following commands.
Kp=30;
Ki=70;
num=[Kp Ki];
den=[1 10 20+Kp Ki];
t=0:0.01:2;
step(num,den,t)
Run this m-file in the Matlab command window, and you should get the following plot.
79
The proportional gain (Kp) is reduced because the integral controller also reduced the
rise time and increased the overshoot as the proportional controller did (double effect).
The above response shows that the integral controller eliminated the steady-state
error.
Proportional-Integral-Derivative control
Considering a PID controller, the closed-loop transfer function of the given system with
a PID controller is:
After several trial and error runs, the gains Kp=350, Ki=300, and Kd=50 provided the
desired response. To confirm, enter the following commands to an m-file and run it in
the command window. You should get the following step response.
Kp=350;
Ki=300;
Kd=50;
num=[Kd Kp Ki];
den=[1 10+Kd 20+Kp Ki];
t=0:0.01:2;
step(num,den,t)
80
Now, we have obtained the system with no overshoot, fast rise time, and no steady-
state error.
General tips for designing a PID controller
When you are designing a PID controller for a given system, follow the steps shown
below to obtain a desired response.
1. Obtain an open-loop response and determine what needs to be improved
2. Add a proportional control to improve the rise time
3. Add a derivative control to improve the overshoot
4. Add an integral control to eliminate the steady-state error
5. Adjust each of Kp, Ki, and Kd until you obtain a desired overall response. You
can always refer to the table shown in this "PID Tutorial" page to find out which
controller controls what characteristics.
Lastly, keep in mind that you do not need to implement all three controllers
(proportional, derivative, and integral) into a single system, if not necessary. For
example, if a PI controller gives a good enough response (like the above example),
then you don't need to implement derivative controller to the system. Keep the
controller as simple as possible.
81
17c. Example 3: DC Motor Speed Modeling
A DC motor has second order speed dynamics when mechanical properties such as
inertia and damping as well as electrical properties such as inductance and resistance
are taken into account. The controller's objective is to maintain the speed of rotation of
the motor shaft with a particular step response. This electromechanical system
example demonstrates slightly more complicated dynamics than does the cruise
control example, requiring more sophisticated controllers.
A common actuator in control systems is the DC motor. It directly provides rotary

motion and, coupled with wheels or drums and cables, can provide transitional motion.
The electric circuit of the armature and the free body diagram of the rotor are shown in
the following figure:
For this example, we will assume the following values for the physical parameters.
These values were derived by experiment from an actual motor under test:
moment of inertia of the rotor (J) = 0.01 kg.m^2/s^2
damping ratio of the mechanical system (b) = 0.1 Nms
electromotive force constant (K=Ke=Kt) = 0.01 Nm/Amp
electric resistance (R) = 1 ohm
electric inductance (L) = 0.5 H
input (V): Source Voltage
output (theta): position of shaft
The rotor and shaft are assumed to be rigid. The motor torque, T, is related to the
armature current, i, by a constant factor Kt. The back emf, e, is related to the rotational
velocity by the following equations:
82
In SI units, Kt (armature constant) is equal to Ke (motor constant).
From the figure above we can write the following equations based on Newton's law
combined with Kirchhoff's law:
1. Transfer Function
Using Laplace Transforms, the above modeling equations can be expressed in terms
of s.
By eliminating I (s) we can get the following open-loop transfer function, where the
rotational speed is the output and the voltage is the input.
2. State-Space
In the state-space form, the equations above can be expressed by choosing the
rotational speed and electric current as the state variables and the voltage as an input.
The output is chosen to be the rotational speed.
Design requirements
First, the uncompensated motor can only rotate at 0.1 rad/sec with an input voltage of
1 Volt (this will be demonstrated later when the open-loop response is simulated).
Since the most basic requirement of a motor is that it should rotate at the desired
speed, the steady-state error of the motor speed should be less than 1%. The other
performance requirement is that the motor must accelerate to its steady-state speed as
soon as it turns on. In this case, we want it to have a settling time of 2 seconds. Since
a speed faster than the reference may damage the equipment, we want to have an
overshoot of less than 5%.
83
If we simulate the reference input (r) by a unit step input, then the motor speed output
should have:
• Settling time less than 2 seconds
• Overshoot less than 5%
• Steady-state error less than 1%
Matlab representation and open-loop response
We can represent the above transfer function into Matlab by defining the numerator
and denominator matrices as follows:

J=0.01;
b=0.1;
K=0.01;
R=1;
L=0.5;
num=K;
den=[(J*L) ((J*R)+(L*b)) ((b*R)+K^2)];
To see how the original open-loop system performs, add the following commands onto
the end of the m-file and run it in the Matlab command window:
step(num,den,0:0.1:3)
title('Step Response for the Open Loop System')
The following plot shows the outcome:
84
From the plot we see that when 1 volt is applied to the system, the motor can only
achieve a maximum speed of 0.1 rad/sec, ten times smaller than our desired speed.
Also, it takes the motor 3 seconds to reach its steady-state speed; this does not satisfy
our 2 seconds settling time criterion.
2. State-Space
We can also represent the system using the state-space equations. Try the following
commands in a new m-file.
J=0.01;
b=0.1;
K=0.01;
R=1;
L=0.5;
A=[-b/J K/J
-K/L -R/L];
B=[0
1/L];
C=[1 0];
D=0;
step(A, B, C, D)
Run this m-file in the Matlab command window, and you should get the same output as
the one shown above.
17d. Example 4: Modeling DC Motor Position

Motor Position Control
The model of the position dynamics of a DC motor is third order, because measuring
position is equivalent to integrating speed, which adds an order to the motor speed
example. In this example, however, the motor parameters are taken from an actual DC
motor under test. This motor has very small inductance, which effectively reduces the
example to second order. It differs from the motor speed example in that there is a free
integrator in the open loop transfer function. Also introduced in this example is the
compensation for a disturbance input. This requires a free integrator in the controller,
creating instability in the system which must be compensated for.
85
Physical Setup
Free body diagram of the rotor:
For this example, we will assume the same values for the physical parameters as used
in the previous example
System Equations
The motor torque, T, is related to the armature current, i, by a constant factor Kt. The
back emf, e, is related to the rotational velocity by the following equations:
In SI units, Kt (armature constant) is equal to Ke (motor constant).

From the figure above we can write the following equations based on Newton's law
combined with Kirchhoff's law:
Using Laplace Transforms the above equations can be expressed in terms of s.
By eliminating I(s) we can get the following transfer function, where the rotating speed
is the output and the voltage is an input.
However during this example we will be looking at the position, as being the output. We
can obtain the position by integrating Theta Dot, therefore we just need to divide the
transfer function by s.
86
2. State Space
These equations can also be represented in state-space form. If we choose motor
position, motor speed, and armature current as our state variables, we can write the
equations as follows:
Design requirements
To position the motor very precisely, the steady-state error of the motor position should
be zero. Also the steady-state error due to a disturbance, is zero as well. Another
performance requirement is that the motor reaches its final position very quickly. In this
case, a settling time of 40ms is assumed and that overshoot is smaller than 16%.
Simulating the reference input (R) by a unit step input, then the motor speed output
should be:
• Settling time less than 40 milliseconds
• No steady-state error
• No steady-state error due to a disturbance
We can put the transfer function into Matlab by defining the numerator and
denominator as vectors:
J=3.2284E-6;
b=3.5077E-6;
K=0.0274;
R=4;
L=2.75E-6;
num=K;
den=[(J*L) ((J*R)+(L*b)) ((b*R)+K^2) 0];
To see how the original open-loop system performs, add the following command onto
the end of the m-file and run it in the Matlab command window:
step(num,den,0:0.001:0.2)
The following plot is thus :
87
From the plot we see that when 1 volt is applied to the system, the motor position
changes by 6 radians, six times greater than our desired position. For a 1 volt step
input the motor should spin through 1 radian. Also, the motor doesn't reach a steady
state which does not satisfy our design criteria
2. State Space
Execute the state space equations into Matlab by defining the system's matrices as
follows:
J=3.2284E-6;
b=3.5077E-6;
K=0.0274;
R=4;
L=2.75E-6;
A=[0 1 0
0 -b/J K/J
0 -K/L -R/L];
B=[0 ; 0 ; 1/L];
C=[1 0 0];
D=[0];
The step response is obtained using the command
step(A,B,C,D)
Unfortunately, Matlab will respond with:
Warning: Divide by zero

??? Index exceeds matrix dimensions.
Error in ==> /usr/local/lib/matlab/toolbox/control/step.m

On line 84 ==> dt = t(2)-t(1);
88
There are numerical scaling problems with this representation of the dynamic
equations. To fix the problem, we scale time by tscale = 1000. Now the output time will
be in milliseconds rather than in seconds. The equations are given by
tscale = 1000;
J=3.2284E-6*tscale^2;
b=3.5077E-6*tscale;
K=0.0274*tscale;
R=4*tscale;
L=2.75E-6*tscale^2;
A=[0 1 0
0 -b/J K/J
0 -K/L -R/L];
B=[0 ; 0 ; 1/L];
C=[1 0 0];
D=[0];
The output appears the same as when obtained through the transfer function, but the
time vector must be divided by tscale.
[y,x,t]=step(A,B,C,D);
plot(t/tscale,y)
ylabel('Amplitude')
xlabel('Time (sec)')
17e. Example 5: Modeling an Inverted Pendulum

The inverted pendulum is a classic controls demonstration where a pole is balanced
vertically on a motorized cart. It is interesting because without control, the system is
unstable. This is a fourth order nonlinear system which is linearized about vertical
equilibrium. In this example, the angle of the vertical pole is the controlled variable, and
the horizontal force applied by the cart is the actuator input.
Problem setup and design requirements

The cart with an inverted pendulum, shown below, is "bumped" with an impulse force,
F. Determine the dynamic equations of motion for the system, and linearize about the
pendulum's angle, theta = Pi (in other words, assume that pendulum does not move
more than a few degrees away from the vertical, chosen to be at an angle of Pi). Find a
controller to satisfy all of the design requirements given below.
89
For this example, the following assumptions apply:
M mass of the cart 0.5 kg
m mass of the pendulum 0.5 kg
b friction of the cart 0.1 N/m/sec
l length to pendulum center of mass 0.3 m
I inertia of the pendulum 0.006 kg*m^2
F force applied to the cart
x cart position coordinate
theta pendulum angle from vertical
For the PID, root locus, and frequency response sections of this problem we will be
only interested in the control of the pendulums position. This is because the techniques
used can only be applied for a single-input-single-output (SISO) system. Therefore,
none of the design criteria deal with the cart's position. For these sections we will
assume that the system starts at equilibrium, and experiences an impulse force of 1N.
The pendulum should return to its upright position within 5 seconds, and never move
more than 0.05 radians away from the vertical.
The design requirements for this system are:
• Settling time of less than 5 seconds.
• Pendulum angle never more than 0.05 radians from the vertical.
However, with the state-space method we are more readily able to deal with a multi-
output system. Therefore, for this section of the Inverted Pendulum example we will
attempt to control both the pendulum's angle and the cart's position. To make the
design more challenging we will be applying a step input to the cart. The cart should
achieve its desired position within 5 seconds and have a rise time under 0.5 seconds.
We will also limit the pendulum's overshoot to 20 degrees (0.35 radians), and it should
also settle in under 5 seconds.
90
The design requirements for the Inverted Pendulum state-space example are:
• Settling time for x and theta of less than 5 seconds.
• Rise time for x of less than 0.5 seconds.
• Overshoot of theta less than 20 degrees (0.35 radians).
Force analysis and system equations

Below are the two Free Body Diagrams of the system:
Summing the forces in the Free Body Diagram of the cart in the horizontal direction,
you get the following equation of motion:
Note that you could also sum the forces in the vertical direction, but no useful
information would be gained.
Summing the forces in the Free Body Diagram of the pendulum in the horizontal
direction, you can get an equation for N:
Substituting this equation into the first equation, you get the first equation of motion for
this system as:
(1)
To get the second equation of motion, sum the forces perpendicular to the pendulum:
To get rid of the P and N terms in the equation above, sum the moments around the
centroid of the pendulum, which results to the following equation:
Combining these last two equations, you get the second dynamic equation:
91
(2)
Since Matlab can only work with linear functions, this set of equations should be
linearized about theta = Pi. Assume that theta = Pi + ø (ø represents a small angle
from the vertical upward direction).
Therefore, cos(theta) = -1, sin(theta) = -ø, and (d(theta)/dt)^2 = 0. After linearization the
two equations of motion become (where u represents the input):
To obtain the transfer function of the linearized system equations analytically, we must
first take the Laplace transform of the system equations. The Laplace transforms are:
NOTE: When finding the transfer function initial conditions are assumed to be zero.
Since we will be looking at the angle Phi as the output of interest, solve the first
equation for X(s),
then substituting into the second equation:
Re-arranging, the transfer function is:
where,
92
From the transfer function above it can be seen that there is both a pole and a zero at
the origin. These can be canceled and the transfer function becomes:
2. State-Space
After a little algebra, the linearized system equations equations can also be
represented in state-space form:
The C matrix is 2 by 4, because both the cart's position and the pendulum's position
are part of the output. For the state-space design problem we will be controlling a multi-
output system so we will be observing the cart's position from the first row of output
and the pendulum's with the second row.
Matlab representation and the open-loop response
The transfer function found from the Laplace transforms can be set up using Matlab by
inputting the numerator and denominator as vectors. Create an m-file and copy the
following text to model the transfer function:
M = .5;
m = 0.2;
b = 0.1;
i = 0.006;
g = 9.8;
l = 0.3;
q = (M+m)*(i+m*l^2)-(m*l)^2; %simplifies input
93
num = [m*l/q 0]
den = [1 b*(i+m*l^2)/q -(M+m)*m*g*l/q -b*m*g*l/q]
Your output should be:
num =
4.5455 0
den =
1.0000 0.1818 -31.1818 -4.4545
To observe the system's velocity response to an impulse force applied to the cart add
the following lines at the end of your m-file:
t=0:0.01:5;
impulse(num,den,t)
axis([0 1 0 60])
Note: Matlab commands from the control system toolbox are highlighted in red.
You should get the following velocity response plot:
As you can see from the plot, the response is entirely unsatisfactory. It is not stable in
open loop. You can change the axis to see more of the response if you need to
convince yourself that the system is unstable.
1. State-Space
Below, we show how the problem would be set up using Matlab for the state-space
model. If you copy the following text into a m-file (or into a '.m' file located in the same
directory as Matlab) and run it, Matlab will give you the A, B, C, and D matrices for the
state-space model and a plot of the response of the cart's position and pendulum angle
to a step input of 0.2 m applied to the cart.
M = .5;
m = 0.2;
94
b = 0.1;
i = 0.006;
g = 9.8;
l = 0.3;
p = i*(M+m)+M*m*l^2; %denominator for the A and B matricies

A = [0 1 0 0;
0 -(i+m*l^2)*b/p (m^2*g*l^2)/p 0;
0 0 0 1;
0 -(m*l*b)/p m*g*l*(M+m)/p 0]
B = [ 0;
(i+m*l^2)/p;
0;
m*l/p]
C = [1 0 0 0;
0 0 1 0]
D = [0;
0]
T=0:0.05:10;
U=0.2*ones(size(T));
[Y,X]=lsim(A,B,C,D,U,T);
plot(T,Y)
axis([0 2 0 100])
You should see the following output after running the m-file:
A=
0 1.0000 0 0
0 -0.1818 2.6727 0
0 0 0 1.0000
0 -0.4545 31.1818 0
B=
0
1.8182
0
4.5455
C=
1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
D=
0
0
95
The blue line represents the cart's position and the green line represents the
pendulum's angle. It is obvious from this plot and the one above that some sort of
control will have to be designed to improve the dynamics of the system. Four example
controllers are included with these tutorials: PID, root locus, frequency response, and
state space. Select from below the one you would like to use.
Note: The solutions shown in the PID, root locus and frequency response examples
may not yield a workable controller for the inverted pendulum problem. As stated
previously, when we put this problem into the single-input, single-output framework, we
ignored the x position of the cart. The pendulum can be stabilized in an inverted
position if the x position is constant or if the cart moves at a constant velocity (no
acceleration). Where possible in these examples, we will show what happens to the
cart's position when our controller is implemented on the system. We emphasize that
the purpose of these examples is to demonstrate design and analysis techniques using
Matlab; not to actually control an inverted pendulum.
96
17f. Example 6: Modeling a Pitch Controller
The pitch angle of an airplane is controlled by adjusting the angle (and therefore the lift
force) of the rear elevator. The aerodynamic forces (lift and drag) as well as the
airplane's inertia are taken into account. This is a third order, nonlinear system which is
linearized about the operating point. This system is also naturally unstable in that it has
a free integrator.

The equations governing the motion of an aircraft are a very complicated set of six
non-linear coupled differential equations. However, under certain assumptions, they
can be decoupled and linearized into the longitudinal and lateral equations. Pitch
control is a longitudinal problem, and in this example, we will design an autopilot that
controls the pitch of an aircraft.
The basic coordinate axes and forces acting on an aircraft are shown in the figure
below:
Assume that the aircraft is in steady-cruise at constant altitude and velocity; thus, the
thrust and drag cancel out and the lift and weight balance out each other. Also,
assume that change in pitch angle does not change the speed of an aircraft under any
circumstance (unrealistic but simplifies the problem a bit). Under these assumptions,
the longitudinal equations of motion of an aircraft can be written as:
97
(1)
Refer to any aircraft-related textbooks for the explanation of how to derive these
equations.
For this system, the input will be the elevator deflection angle, and the output will be
the pitch angle.
Design requirements
The next step is to set some design criteria. We want to design a feedback controller
so that the output has an overshoot of less than 10%, rise time of less than 2 seconds,
settling time of less than 10 seconds, and the steady-state error of less than 2%. For
example, if the input is 0.2 rad (11 degress), then the pitch angle will not exceed 0.22
rad, reaches 0.2 rad within 2 seconds, settles 2% of the steady-state within 10
seconds, and stays within 0.196 to 0.204 rad at the steady-state.
• Overshoot: Less than 10%
• Rise time: Less than 2 seconds
• Settling time: Less than 10 seconds
• Steady-state error: Less than 2%
Transfer function and the state-space

Before finding transfer function and the state-space model, let's plug in some numerical
values to simplify the modelling equations (1) shown above.
(2)
These values are taken from the data from one of the Boeing's commercial aircraft.
To find the transfer function of the above system, we need to take the Laplace
transform of the above modelling equations (2). Recall that, when finding a transfer
function, zero initial conditions must be assumed. The Laplace transform of the
above equations are shown below.
98
Simplifying, the following transfer function is obtained.
2. State-space
Knowing the fact that the modelling equations (2) are already in the state-variable form,
we can rewrite them into the state-space model.
Since our output is the pitch angle, the output equation is:

Now, we are ready to observe the system characteristics using Matlab. First, let's
obtain an open-loop system to a step input and determine which system characteristics
need improvement. Let the input (delta e) be 0.2 rad (11 degrees). Create a new m-file
and enter the following commands:
de=0.2;
num=[1.151 0.1774];
den=[1 0.739 0.921 0];
step (de*num,den)
Running this m-file in the Matlab command window will give the following plot.
99
From the plot, we see that the open-loop response does not satisfy the design criteria
at all. In fact the open-loop response is unstable.
If you noticed, the above m-file uses the numerical values from the transfer function. To
use the state-space model, enter the following commands into a new m-file (instead of
the one shown above) and run it in the command window.
de=0.2;
A=[-0.313 56.7 0; -0.0139 -0.426 0; 0 56.7 0];

B=[0.232; 0.0203; 0];
C=[0 0 1];
D=[0];
step(A,B*de,C,D)
The same response as the one shown above is expected to be obtained.

Note: It is possible to convert from the state-space to transfer function, or vice versa
using Matlab.
Closed-loop transfer function

To solve this problem, a feedback controller will be added to improve the system
performance. The figure shown below is the block diagram of a typical unity feedback
system.
A controller needs to be designed so that the step response satisfies all design
requirements. Four different methods to design a controller are listed at the bottom of
this page. You may choose: PID, Root-locus, Frequency response, or State-space.
17g. Example 7: Modeling the Ball and Beam Experiment
This is another classic controls demo. A ball is placed on a straight beam and rolls
back and forth as one end of the beam is raised and lowered by a cam. The position of
the ball is controlled by changing the angular position of the cam. This is a second
order system, since only the inertia of the ball is taken into account, and not that of the
100
cam or the beam, although the mass of the beam is taken into account in the fourth
order state-space model. The equations are linearized by assuming small deflections
of the cam and beam. This is an example of a double integrator, which needs to be
stabilized.
Problem Setup
A ball is placed on a beam, see figure below, where it is allowed to roll with 1 degree of
freedom along the length of the beam. A lever arm is attached to the beam at one end
and a servo gear at the other. As the servo gear turns by an angle theta, the lever
changes the angle of the beam by alpha. When the angle is changed from the vertical
position, gravity causes the ball to roll along the beam. A controller will be designed for
this system so that the ball's position can be manipulated.
For this problem, assume that the ball rolls without slipping and friction between the
beam and ball is negligible. The constants and variables for this example are defined
as follows:
M mass of the ball 0.11 kg

R radius of the ball 0.015 m
d lever arm offset 0.03 m
g gravitational acceleration 9.8 m/s^2
L length of the beam 1.0 m
J ball's moment of inertia 9.99e-6 kgm^2
r ball position coordinate
alpha beam angle coordinate
theta servo gear angle
101
The design criteria for this problem are:
• Settling time less than 3 seconds
System Equations
The Lagrangian equation of motion for the ball is given by the following:
Linearization of this equation about the beam angle, alpha = 0, gives us the following
linear approximation of the system:
The equation which relates the beam angle to the angle of the gear can be
approximated as linear by the equation below:
Substituting this into the previous equation, we get:
Taking the Laplace transform of the equation above, the following equation is found:
NOTE: When taking the Laplace transform to find the transfer function initial conditions
are assumed to be zero.
Rearranging we find the transfer function from the gear angle (theta(s)) to the ball
position (R(s)).
102
It should be noted that the above plant transfer function is a double integrator. As such
it is marginally stable and will provide a challenging control problem.
2. State-Space
The linearized system equations can also be represented in state-space form. This can
be done by selecting the ball's position (r) and velocity (rdot) as the state variables and
the gear angle (theta) as the input. The state-space representation is shown below:
However, for our state-space example we will be using a slightly different model. The
same equation for the ball still applies but instead of controlling the position through the
gear angle theta, we will control alpha-doubledot. This is essentially controlling the
torque of the beam. Below is the representation of this system:
Note: For this system the gear and lever arm would not be used, instead a motor at the
center of the beam will apply torque to the beam, to control the ball's position.
103
Matlab Representation and Open-Loop Response
The transfer function found from the Laplace transform can be implemented in Matlab
by inputting the numerator and denominator as vectors. To do this we must create an
m-file and copy the following text into it:
m = 0.111;
R = 0.015;
g = -9.8;
L = 1.0;
d = 0.03;
J = 9.99e-6;
K = (m*g*d)/(L*(J/R^2+m)); %simplifies input
num = [-K];
den = [1 0 0];
printsys(num,den)
The output should be:

num/den =
0.21
----------
s^2
Now, we would like to observe the ball's response to a step input of 0.25 m. To do this
you will need to add the following line to your m-file:
step(0.25*num,den)
NOTE: Matlab commands from the control system toolbox are highlighted in red.
The will be plot below, showing the balls position as a function of time:
104
From this plot it is clear that the system is unstable in open-loop causing the ball to roll
right off the end of the beam. Therefore, some method of controlling the ball's position
in this system is required. Three examples of controller design are listed below for the
transfer function problem. You may select from PID, Root Locus, and Frequency
Response.
2. State-Space
The state-space equations can be represented in Matlab with the following commands
(these equations are for the torque control model).
m = 0.111;
R = 0.015;
g = -9.8;
J = 9.99e-6;
H = -m*g/(J/(R^2)+m);
A=[0 1 0 0
00H0
0001
0 0 0 0];
B=[0;0;0;1];
C=[1 0 0 0];
D=[0];
The step response to a 0.25m desired position can be viewed by running the command
below:
step(A,B*.25,C,D)
The output will look like the following:
Like the plot for the transfer function this plot shows that the system is unstable and the
ball will roll right off the end of the beam. Therefore, we will require some method of
controlling the ball's position in this system. The State-Space example in the tutorial
above shows how to implement a controller for this type of system.
105
Now try this problem on your own!
Bus Suspension
This example looks at the active

control of the vertical motion of a bus
suspension. It takes into account both
the inertia of the bus and the inertia of
the suspension/tires, as well as
springs and dampers. An actuator is
added between the suspension and
the bus. This fourth order system is
particularly difficult to control because
of the existence of two zeros near the
imaginary axis. This requires careful
compensation.
State Space Tutorial

Observer design
Key Matlab commands used in this tutorial: acker, lsim, place, plot, rscale
Non-standard Matlab commands used in this tutorial are highlighted in green.
There are several different ways to describe a system of linear differential equations.
The state-space representation is given by the equations:
where x is an n by 1 vector representing the state (commonly position and velocity

106
variables in mechanical systems), u is a scalar representing the input (commonly a
force or torque in mechanical systems), and y is a scalar representing the output. The
matrices A (n by n), B (n by 1), and C (1 by n) determine the relationships between the
state and input and output variables. Note that there are n first-order differential
equations. State space representation can also be used for systems with multiple
inputs and outputs (MIMO), but we will only use single-input, single-output (SISO)
systems in these tutorials.
To introduce the state space design method, we will use the
magnetically suspended ball as an example. The current
through the coils induces a magnetic force which can
balance the force of gravity and cause the ball (which is
made of a magnetic material) to be suspended in midair.
The modeling of this system has been established in many
control text books (including Automatic Control Systems by
B. C. Kuo, the seventh edition). The equations for the
system are given by:
where h is the vertical position of the ball, i is the current through the electromagnet, V
is the applied voltage, M is the mass of the ball, g is gravity, L is the inductance, R is
the resistance, and K is a coefficient that determines the magnetic force exerted on the
ball. For simplicity, we will choose values M = 0.05 Kg, K = 0.0001, L = 0.01 H, R = 1
Ohm, g = 9.81 m/sec^2 . The system is at equilibrium (the ball is suspended in midair)
whenever h = K i^2/Mg (at which point dh/dt = 0). We linearize the equations about the
point h = 0.01 m (where the nominal current is about 7 amp) and get the state space
equations:
where: is the set of state variables for the system (a 3x1 vector), u is the input
voltage (delta V), and y (the output), is delta h. Enter the system matrices into a m-file.
A=[ 0 1 0
980 0 -2.8
0 0 -100];
B = [0
0
100];
C = [1 0 0];
107
One of the first things you want to do with the state equations is find the poles of the
system; these are the values of s where det(sI - A) = 0, or the eigenvalues of the A
matrix:
poles = eig(A)
You should get the following three poles:
poles =
31.3050
-31.3050
-100.0000
One of the poles is in the right-half plane, which means that the system is unstable in
open-loop.
To check out what happens to this unstable system when there is a nonzero initial
condition, add the following lines to your m-file,
t = 0:0.01:2;
u = 0*t;
x0 = [0.005 0 0];
[y,x] = lsim(A,B,C,0,u,t,x0);
h = x(:,2); %Delta-h is the output of interest
plot(t,h)
and run the file again.
It looks like the distance between the ball and the electromagnet will go to infinity, but
probably the ball hits the table or the floor first (and also probably goes out of the range
where our linearization is valid).
Let's build a controller for this system. The schematic of a full-state feedback system is
the following:
108
Recall that the characteristic polynomial for this closed-loop system is the determinant
of (sI-(A-BK)). Since the matrices A and B*K are both 3 by 3 matrices, there will be 3
poles for the system. By using full-state feedback we can place the poles anywhere we
want. We could use the Matlab function place to find the control matrix, K, which will
give the desired poles.
Before attempting this method, we have to decide where we want the closed-loop
poles to be. Suppose the criteria for the controller were settling time < 0.5 sec and
overshoot < 5%, then we might try to place the two dominant poles at -10 +/- 10i (at
zeta = 0.7 or 45 degrees with sigma = 10 > 4.6*2). The third pole we might place at -50
to start, and we can change it later depending on what the closed-loop behavior is.
Remove the lsim command from your m-file and everything after it, then add the
following lines to your m-file,
p1 = -10 + 10i;
p2 = -10 - 10i;
p3 = -50;
109
The overshoot is too large (there are also zeros in the transfer function which can
increase the overshoot; you do not see the zeros in the state-space formulation). Try
placing the poles further to the left to see if the transient response improves (this
should also make the response faster).
p1 = -20 + 20i;
p2 = -20 - 20i;
p3 = -100;
This time the overshoot is smaller. Consult your textbook for further suggestions on
choosing the desired closed-loop poles.
Compare the control effort required (K) in both cases. In general, the farther you move
the poles, the more control effort it takes.
Note: If you want to place two or more poles at the same position, place will not work.
You can use a function called acker which works similarly to place:
K = acker(A,B,[p1 p2 p3])
Now, we will take the control system as defined above and apply a step input (we
choose a small value for the step, so we remain in the region where our linearization is
valid). Replace t,u and lsim in your m-file with the following,
t = 0:0.01:2;
u = 0.001*ones(size(t));
lsim(A-B*K,B,C,0,u,t)
110
The system does not track the step well at all; not only is the magnitude not one, but it
is negative instead of positive!
Recall the schematic above, we don't compare the output to the reference; instead we
measure all the states, multiply by the gain vector K, and then subtract this result from
the reference. There is no reason to expect that K*x will be equal to the desired output.
To eliminate this problem, we can scale the reference input to make it equal to
K*x_steadystate. This scale factor is often called Nbar; it is introduced as shown in the
following schematic:
We can get Nbar from Matlab by using the function rscale (place the following line of
code after K = ...).
Nbar=rscale(A,B,C,0,K)
Note that this function is not standard in Matlab. You will need to copy it to a new m-file
to use it. Click here for more information on using functions in Matlab. Now, if we want
to find the response of the system under state feedback with this introduction of the
reference, we simply note the fact that the input is multiplied by this new factor, Nbar:
lsim(A-B*K,B*Nbar,C,0,u,t)
111
and now a step can be tracked reasonably well.
Observer design
When we can't measure all the states x (as is commonly the case), we can build an
observer to estimate them, while measuring only the output y = C x. For the magnetic
ball example, we will add three new, estimated states to the system. The schematic is
as follows:
The observer is basically a copy of the plant; it has the same input and almost the
same differential equation. An extra term compares the actual measured output y to
the estimated output ; this will cause the estimated states to approach the values
of the actual states x. The error dynamics of the observer are given by the poles of (A-
L*C).
First we need to choose the observer gain L. Since we want the dynamics of the
observer to be much faster than the system itself, we need to place the poles at least
five times farther to the left than the dominant poles of the system. If we want to use
place, we need to put the three observer poles at different locations.
op1 = -100;
op2 = -101;
112
op3 = -102;
Because of the duality between controllability and observability, we can use the same
technique used to find the control matrix, but replacing the matrix B by the matrix C and
taking the transposes of each matrix (consult your text book for the derivation):
L = place(A',C',[op1 op2 op3])';
The equations in the block diagram above are given for . It is conventional to write
the combined equations for the system plus observer using the original state x plus the
error state: e = x - . We use as state feedback u = -K . After a little bit of algebra
(consult your textbook for more details), we arrive at the combined state and error
equations with the full-state feedback and an observer:
At = [A - B*K B*K
zeros(size(A)) A - L*C];
Bt = [ B*Nbar
zeros(size(B))];
Ct = [ C zeros(size(C))];
To see how the response looks to a nonzero initial condition with no reference input,
add the following lines into your m-file. We typically assume that the observer begins
with zero initial condition, =0. This gives us that the initial condition for the error is
equal to the initial condition of the state.
lsim(At,Bt,Ct,0,zeros(size(t)),t,[x0 x0])
Responses of all the states are plotted below. Recall that lsim gives us x and e; to get
we need to compute x-e.
113
Zoom in to see some detail:
The blue solid line is the response of the ball position , the blue dotted line is the
estimated state ;
The green solid line is the response of the ball speed , the green dotted line is the
estimated state ;
The red solid line is the response of the current , the red dotted line is the estimated
state .
We can see that the observer estimates the states quickly and tracks the states
reasonably well in the steady-state.
The plot above can be obtained by using the plot command.
114

PID Controller Back Up

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PID Controller Back Up

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

PID Controller Back Up

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laplace Transform

is defined for (Abramowitz and Stegun 1972).

(Oppenheim et al. 1997). The unilateral Laplace transform is implemented

The first of these is derived as follows:

The Fourier transform of a derivative of a function is simply related to the transform of t

Now use integration by parts

This process can be iterated for the th derivative to yield

The important modulation theorem of Fourier transforms allows to be expres

Since the derivative of the Fourier transform is given by

The variance of a Fourier transform is

and it is true that

so has the Fourier transform

If has a Fourier transform , then the Fourier transform obeys a similarity

so has the Fourier transform

The "equivalent width" of a Fourier transform is :

The "autocorrelation width" is

The following table summarized some common Fourier transform pairs.

Fourier transform--exponential function

Fourier transform--Heaviside step function

Fourier transform--Lorentzian function

Fourier transform--ramp function

Similarly, the -dimensional Fourier transform can be defined for , by

This definition is implemented in Mathematica as ZTransform[a, n, z]. Similarly, the

the one-sided shah function with period is given by

and is the Kronecker delta, giving

An alternative equivalent definition is

This definition is essentially equivalent to the usual one by taking .

The -transform of the general power function can be computed analytically as

The (unilateral) -transform of a sequence is defined as

This definition is implemented in Mathematica as ZTransform[a, n, z]. Similarly, the

the one-sided shah function with period is given by

and is the Kronecker delta, giving

An alternative equivalent definition is

This definition is essentially equivalent to the usual one by taking .

The -transform of the general power function can be computed analytically as

where the are Eulerian numbers and is a polylogarithm. Amazingly, the -

1. What is a PID Controller?

3. PID Control loop basics

4. PID controller theory

4a. The Proportional term

Plot of PV vs time, for three values of Kp (Ki and Kd held constant)

4b. The Integral term

Plot of PV vs time, for three values of Ki (Kp and Kd held constant)

4c. The Derivative term

Plot of PV vs time, for three values of Kd (Kp and Ki held constant)

where the tuning parameters are:

5b. Optimum behavior

5d. Manual tuning

5e. Ziegler–Nichols method

5f. PID tuning software

6. Modifications to the PID algorithm

6a. Integral windup

6b. Freezing the integral function in case of disturbances

6c. Replacing the integral function by a model based part

6e. Setpoint ramping

6f. Setpoint weighting

8b. Noise in derivative

9b. Other improvements

10. Cascade control