(6.1)
"!
3
4 21 0%$'&) (#
However, if the system is unstable, the transient response will increase very
quickly (exponentially) in time, and in the most cases the system will be
practically unusable or even destroyed during the unstable transient response
(as can occur, for example, in some electrical networks). Even if the system
is asymptotically stable, the transient response should be carefully monitored
since some undesired phenomena like highfrequency oscillations (e.g. in aircraft
during landing and takeoff), rapid changes, and high magnitudes of the output
may occur.
Assuming that the system is asymptotically stable, then the system response
in the long run is determined by its steady state component only. For control
261
262
systems it is important that steady state response values are as close as possible
to desired ones (specied ones) so that we have to study the corresponding errors,
which represent the difference between the actual and desired system outputs at
steady state, and examine conditions under which these errors can be reduced
or even eliminated.
In Section 6.1 we nd analytically the response of a secondorder system
due to a unit step input. The obtained result is used in Section 6.2 to dene
important parameters that characterize the system transient response. Of course,
these parameters can be exactly dened and determined only for secondorder
systems. For higherorder systems, only approximations for the transient response
parameters can be obtained by using computer simulation. Several cases of real
control systems and the corresponding MATLAB simulation results for the system
transient response are presented in Sections 6.3 and 6.5. The steady state errors
of linear control systems are dened in Section 6.4, and the feedback elements
which help to reduce the steady state errors to zero are identied. In this section
we also give a simplied version of the basic linear control problem originally
dened in Section 1.1. Section 6.6 presents a summary of the main control system
specications and introduces the concept of control system sensitivity function.
In Section 6.7 a laboratory experiment is formulated.
Chapter Objectives
The chapter has the main objective of introducing and explaining the concepts
that characterize system transient and steady state responses. In addition, system
dominant poles and the system sensitivity function are introduced in this chapter.
(6.3)
T ca
A@
S ` Y e@ ` Y dbT S @ HG8
C HG8PI E
A@
S` Y
R Q TX@ V R T S HG8
A@
R Q WU2@ C HG8PI FDB@97
A@ E C A 8
263
K
s(Ts+1)
t s ri q g
dD"p hf
+
s xg vq
w ur
U(s)
(6.5)
Y(s)
Quantities and
are called, respectively, the system damping ratio and the
system natural frequency. The system eigenvalues obtained from (6.4) are given
by
(6.6)
d 0 P X
where
is the system damped frequency. The location of the system poles and
the relation between damping ratio, natural and damped frequencies are given
in Figure 6.2.
Im{s}
cos =
d = n 1 2
Re{s}
n fj f
kmhlkihge
264
qp
2!o
o b}
o
~v }
}
}{ z
u x y w z q w dUx q
y vw
xy
vu s
s q U!q tr
(6.7)
Depending on the value of the damping ratio three interesting cases appear:
(a) the critically damped case,
; (b) the overdamped case,
; and
(c) the underdamped case,
. All of them are considered below. These
cases are distinguished by the nature of the system eigenvalues. In case (a) the
eigenvalues are multiple and real, in (b) they are real and distinct, and in case
(c) the eigenvalues are complex conjugate.
o b}
yw
For
, we get from (6.6) a double pole at
output is obtained from
. The corresponding
o
~v }
xu y w z q
x w z
w z
s y q q u y q s q Hq r
vu s
y w o o v xy w
gH y w dl!Xu s
o v
(6.8)
The shape of this response is given in Figure 6.3a, where the location of the
is also presented.
system poles
x x
u v ! v s
x
dg'! z 1Gdlg%H z u s
o v
}
Dw
x y w }bz q z dw z y w bz q z q Hq
o v u r
s
as
dw 0y w }
at
For the overdamped case, we have two real and asymptotically stable poles
. The corresponding closedloop response is easily obtained from
(6.9)
265
0.5
0.5
p1
0
p1=p2
0
p1
0.5
p2
0.5
1
p2
1
2
1
(a)
1
4
10
2
(b)
2
2
12
0
(c)
1.5
(c)
1
(a)
0.5
0
0
(b)
14
16
(6.10)
DBb dBD
g g FDd t
Applying the Laplace transform it is easy to show (see Problem 6.1) that the
system output in the time domain is given by
(6.11)
2
'
gd
i g
(6.12)
266
y(t)
OS
1.05
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.10
tr
tp
ts
B
d
dg!
D
g
'G
idg!
or
267
U
(6.13)
It is left as an exercise to students to derive (6.13) (see Problem 6.2). From this
equation we have
WP
B v
(6.14)
, i.e. as
(6.15)
c
4X
!
) 2
6 5423(
1
is
% #
' & $ "
0
)
0(
1
$
(6.16)
(6.17)
D
S R P I G F D
YT
X a ` F " WVQ&H3U
b
RP IG FD B 1 ) 2
bCTS$Q&H3EC6 5423(
)
@(
1
A
8
97
Overshoot is very often expressed in percent, so that we can dene the maximum
percent overshoot as
(6.18)
h
&)
d2
p
0c X
D
YW
X a ` F " 1
b
8
97
h
i)
8
g7
e
fd
From Figure 6.4, the expression for the response 5 percent settling time can
be obtained as
q
rR P &HF D
I G
s
d1 2 @(
)
B
C
leads to
v
V!
0xss0
t
w
xv u 2
t y
!@
t
(6.19)
(6.20)
268
The response rise time is dened as the time required for the unit step
response to change from 0.1 to 0.9 of its steady state value. The rise time
is inversely proportional to the system bandwidth, i.e. the wider bandwidth, the
smaller the rise time. However, designing systems with wide bandwidth is costly,
which indicates that systems with very fast response are expensive to design.
Example 6.1: Consider the following secondorder system
!4
d
3
xi
ut r
Qs
n l k i
3mjh
g

}
{ z
f e
xyf e
g
g
f
e
v
we
t z
v e
~
"
f e
q
~
i
~
t 'z
r
r z
!"
gu
t
0r
g&
269
1.2
y(t)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
time t [sec]
3.5
4.5
3
270
Im{s}
Re{s}
This analysis can be also justied by using the closedloop system transfer
function. Consider, for example, a system described by its transfer function as
46
C&
&&
Ci6Qi
3
4
i
if
Since the poles at 60 and 70 are far to the left, their contribution to the system
and
). The
response is negligible (they decay very quickly to zero as
transfer function can be formally simplied as follows
$&
6$03
(6.21)
&
w
'
6
!
!'
4'sU
'
46Qi
C&Q
C&$Q4
64
271
0.25
0.2
(1):y(t), (2):yr(t)
(1)
0.15
(2)
0.1
0.05
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
time t [sec]
3.5
4.5
272
text(0.41,0.13,(2));
&&
"C&$@C &&m i
4
4
i}
i
'4
!
'"
&
i6
Ci
$ !
34
&
The step responses of the original and approximate reducedorder systems are
presented in Figure 6.8.
0.12
0.1
(1):y(t), (2):yr(t)
0.08
(2)
(1)
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
time t [sec]
3.5
4.5
Figure 6.8: System step responses for the original (1) and
approximate (2) systems with complex conjugate poles
273
It can be seen from this gure that a very good approximation for the step
response is obtained by using the approximate reducedorder model.
However, the above technique is rather supercial. In addition, for multiinput multioutput systems this procedure becomes computationally cumbersome.
In that case we need a more systematic method. In the control literature one is
able to nd several techniques used for the system order reduction. One of them,
the method of singular perturbations (Kokotovi and Khalil, 1986; Kokotovi
c
c
et al., 1986), is presented below. The method systematically generalizes the
previously explained idea of dominant poles.
The eigenvalues of certain systems (having large and small time constants,
or slow and fast system modes) are clustered in two or several groups (see
Figure 6.9). According to the theory of singular perturbations, if it is possible
to nd an isolated group of poles (eigenvalues) closest to the imaginary axis,
then the system response will be predominantly determined by that group of
eigenvalues.
Im{s}
Re{s}
dominant
slow modes
fast modes
(6.22)
g0v
0v
Q
v
274
where is a small positive parameter. It indicates that the time derivatives for
state variables
are large, so that variables
change quickly, in contrast to
variables , which are slow. If the state variables
are asymptotically stable,
then they decay very quickly, so that after the fast dynamics disappear
,
we get an approximation for the fast subsystem as
Q" 0
(6.23)
6& $$v "9
$&
$$
(6.24)
6&
!
(6.25)
$$
$&6
"
6&$
$&
' !
#
$ g&
#
%js 9 $ "
"
(
)
ff
bffe
(
)
$&
SIRQI
BP
SACEX
BFW
FP B
$QSICI
bIQQ@
BP9
P BA9
QSWC@
HEbHTE@
BI9
BIF
g 9ac9CaEI
` B9
$YPEQP
P BI
CGVC9
HESHCU
BA9
H B
EGFC
9B H
DCaA
( 1
4(
3( 1
)2%(
P B
dbITI
A BFW
abFCaX 8
9 9B W
EDC9
9 B
TT 7
9 9B A 9
EDC@ 6777
3 ( % 4(
5 ( 1
0 $&6
(
275
ctTE
u
bCax
uy
t
t 0r
p
u
ESyCy SCUx
uwt
t utw
T ECXx TbCx ctvEQsqUh
t uy
w uttr p i
h u wt x u w x w u e x u x u w
ESCaUgCabvaCabyfdCvYQXCE TXx p %
which indicates that the system has two slow (2.85 and 7.78) and three fast
modes. The small parameter represents the separation of system eigenvalues
into two disjoint groups. It can be roughly estimated as
(the ratio of the smallest and largest eigenvalues in the given slow and fast
subsets). We use MATLAB to partition matrices
as follows
tu
DC j EbyaE$kR 'i
w uel u j
eps=0.1;
A1=A(1:2,1:2);
A2=A(1:2,3:5);
A3=A(3:5,1:2)*eps;
A4=A(3:5,3:5)*eps;
B1=B(1:2,1:2);
B2=B(3:5,1:2)*eps;
C1=C(1:2,1:2);
C2=C(1:2,3:5);
hayReqwESuCXnCQevabTx p )v
x w uy
m
t
aEbT0r p m s
y u
wy u
aEESC
t w y u tr
TEabCnsp m h
u
sEbyTy
bCUx
uwt
e u tt u
Rq$kC aCSC0r p m
y u
e Du
t
raEabwGeCXt x aQvpC nsp
ee uw
Ca C w Rqbu ox r m
e e
276
1.2
y(t), yr(t)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
time t [sec]
3.5
4.5
Models of many real physical linear control systems that have the singularly
perturbed structure, displaying slow and fast state variables, can be found in
Gaji and Shen (1993).
c
A MATLAB laboratory experiment involving system order reduction and
comparison of corresponding system trajectories and outputs of a real physical
control system by using the method of singular perturbations is formulated in
Section 6.7.
277
dene the socalled steady state errors, which represent the differences at steady
state of the actual and desired system responses (outputs).
Before we proceed to steady state error analysis, we introduce a simplied
version of the basic linear control system problem dened in Section 1.1.
Simplied Basic Linear Control Problem
As dened in Section 1.1 the basic linear control problem is still very difcult
to solve. A simplied version of this problem can be formulated as follows.
Apply to the system input a time function equal to the desired system output.
This time function is known as the systems reference input and is denoted by
. Note that
. Compare the actual and desired outputs by feeding
back the actual output variable. The difference
represents the
error signal. Use the error signal together with simple controllers (if necessary)
to drive the system under consideration such that
is reduced as much as
possible, at least at steady state. If a simple controller is used in the feedback
loop (Figure 6.11) the error signal has to be slightly redened, see formula (6.26).
In the following we use this simplied basic linear control problem in order
to identify the structure of controllers (feedback elements) that for certain types
of reference inputs (desired outputs) produce zero steady state errors.
Consider the simplest feedback conguration of a singleinput singleoutput
system given in Figure 6.11.
{zy ~ {zy
}) })ax
{zy
v
{zy ~ {zy x {z
})qay
E(s)
{zy
)ax
U(s) = R(s)
Controller  Plant
G(s)
Y(s)
H(s)
Feedback Element
qqd
278
q)
Xv
qdq
(6.26)
qv)vnUq)
is eliminated or reduced to its minimal value at steady state.
From the block diagram given in Figure 6.11 we have
q)qq)&uqq)
so that the expression for the error is given by
(6.27)
qq) q)
q
The steady state error component can be obtained by using the nal value theorem
of the Laplace transform as
(6.28)
This expression will be used in order to determine the nature of the feedback
element
such that the steady state error is reduced to zero for different
types of desired outputs. We will particularly consider step, ramp, and parabolic
functions as desired system outputs.
Before we proceed to the actual steady state error analysis, we introduce one
additional denition.
Denition 6.1 The type of feedback control system is determined by the
number of poles of the openloop feedback system transfer function located at
the origin, i.e. it is equal to , where is obtained from
v)
(6.29)
Now we consider the steady state errors for different desired outputs, namely
unit step, unit ramp, and unit parabolic outputs.
279
uX )
Y
nqnv) D qvn X) )
vvnUad
where
(6.30)
D
qq X @
It can be seen from (6.30) that the steady state error for the unit step reference
is reduced to zero for
. Examining closely (6.31), taking into account
.
(6.29), we see that this condition is satised for
Thus, we can conclude that the feedback type system of order at least one
allows the system output at steady state to track the unit step function perfectly.
Unit Ramp Function as Desired Output
In this case the steady state error is obtained as
}vnq uX)c
c
v)v) X)c q) X)
(6.32)
where
(6.33)
}vnq X)c d
is known as the velocity constant. It can be easily concluded from (6.29) and
(6.33) that
, i.e.
for
. Thus, systems having two and more
pure integrators (
terms) in the feedback loop will be able to perfectly track
the unit ramp function as a desired system output.
Unit Parabolic Function as Desired Output
so that from (6.28)
For a unit parabolic function we have
)
vv
}vnq) X
D
D
qq) X )
$dq)U
(6.34)
, is dened by
(6.35)
c
vnq) X)d
280
1 ) ( '
320&
are
$$
&%#
1 B @ 8
C5A97 6
o&%#
$ $
&$ #
$
Q IH G E @ 8 @ 1
FRP%CFAD&
X
4
d5
d
!
"
"
"
Since the openloop transfer function of this system has one integrator the output
of the closedloop system can perfectly track only the unit step.
S
`6
aY
V0%UT&
6
6 UV
X
$$
9W#
The unit step response of this system is presented in Figure 6.12, from which it
can be clearly seen that the steady state output is equal to
; hence the steady
state error is equal to
.
b6
aY
`6
fY
b6
eY
c
d
Note that the transient analysis and the study of steady state errors can be
performed for discretetime linear systems in exactly the same way as was used
for continuoustime systems. The steady state errors for discretetime systems
281
y(t)
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
time t [sec]
3.5
4.5
yw t
Pxvu
t p
U
t
w
3
tr p
asqi
For a system represented in the state space form, the step response is obtained
by using the MATLAB function [y,x]=step(A,B,C,D,1,t), where 1
282
indicates that the step signal is applied to the rst system input and t represents
time. The step response of this system is given in Figures 6.13 and 6.14.
1.4
1.2
y(t)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.5
1.5
2.5
time t [sec]
3.5
4.5
&v V
0
0
h l f e
e kji
lr
fYe
p g n m
qso&
p u
vWw
p u
vt
n s
~ u u er e
}vveYt9W
z y y
~ u u er w
F}vj}{&vx
z y y
(6.36)
9Yx
9y
{0
W3&y
P
%FCy
y
PV9y x
283
1.2
y(t)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
10
15
20
time t [sec]
25
30
35
40
F} V
0
0
284
&5
dkUv
&5
The closedloop transfer function for the system in Figure 6.11 is given by
(6.37)
&9
v
285
(6.38)
9%
v
(6.39)
&
&
Uv
U
This leads to
&
d%
(6.41)
d
where
(6.40)
vC
represents the socalled control system sensitivity function. Note that the sensitivity function depends on the complex frequency . It follows from formula (6.40)
that the magnitude of the sensitivity function should be chosen to be as small as
possible over the frequency range of interest. Since from (6.41)
, it
follows that the closedloop relative transfer function error is reduced compared
to the openloop relative plant transfer function error. In conclusion, feedback
alone reduces system sensitivity to system parameter variations.
Finally, let us point out that feedback also decreases system sensitivity to
external disturbances. This problem has been already tacitly studied in Section
2.2see the block diagram presented in Figure 2.3 and formula (2.18).
C
286
vd5do
Hint: Use t=0:0.5;30 while plotting the step response. Find the exact value
for
by using formula (6.36).
Part 5.1 Use the method of singular perturbations in order to reduce the
fthorder model of a voltage regulator considered in Kokotovi (1972) to an
c
equivalent secondorder slow model. The voltage regulator matrices are given
by
&
j}
jY}
jk
eY
jA
287
6.8 References
Arkun, Y. and S. Ramakrishnan, Bounds on the optimum quadratic cost of
structureconstrained controllers, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol.
AC28, 924927, 1983.
Chiang, R. and M. Safonov, Robust Control Tool Box Users Guide, The Math
Works, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, 1992.
Gaji , Z. and X. Shen, Parallel Algorithms for Optimal Control of Large Scale
c
Linear Systems, SpringerVerlag, London, 1993.
Green, M. and D. Limebeer, Linear Robust Control, Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey, 1995.
Grimble, M., Robust Industrial Control, Prentice Hall International, Hemel
Hempstead, 1994.
Kokotovi , P., Feedback design of large scale linear systems, in Feedback
c
Systems, J. Cruz (ed.), McGrawHill, New York, 1972.
Kokotovi , P. and R. Rutman, Sensitivity of automatic control systems, Auc
tomation and Remote Control, vol. 26, 247249, 1965.
Kokotovi , P. and H. Khalil, Singular Perturbations in Systems and Control,
c
IEEE Press, New York, 1986.
Kokotovi , P., H. Khalil, and J. OReilly, Singular Perturbation Methods in
c
Control: Analysis and Design, Academic Press, Orlando, Florida, 1986.
Morari, M. and E. Zariou, Robust Process Control, Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey, 1989.
Tomovi , R. Sensitivity Analysis of Dynamic Systems, McGrawHill, New York,
c
1963.
Tomovi , R. and M. Vukobratovi , General Sensitivity Theory, Elsevier, New
c
c
York, 1972.
6.9 Problems
6.2
and
6.1
288
6.3
Find the transient response parameters for the following secondorder systems
6.4
Consider the secondorder system that has a zero in its transfer function,
that is
&
&
&
t
Use the Laplace transform to obtain its step response. Find the transient
response parameters and the steady state error for a unit step. Compare the
step responses of this system and the system considered in Problem 6.3a.
Plot the corresponding responses by using MATLAB.
6.5
Determine the steady state errors for unit step, unit ramp, and unit parabolic
inputs of a unity feedback control system having the plant transfer function
6.6
Compare the steady state errors for unit feedback control systems represented by
$
%"
# #
"
"
&
&
&
&
&
6.7
&0
calculate steady state errors, pick time, 5 percent settling time, and maximum percent overshoot.
289
H 9 3 1)
I@AG(
F 3 D B
!EC1
&
'
)
A1
6.8
'
9 3 1) 53 1)
@876420(
has prespecied values for the maximum percent overshoot and the peak
time.
6.9
Solve Problem 6.8 by requiring that the peak time and settling time be
prespecied.
6.10 Find the closedloop system transfer function(s) for the F8 aircraft from
Section 3.5.2 by using MATLAB, and calculate the steady state error(s)
due to a unit step input by using formula (6.36). Note that there are two
outputs in this problem.
6.11 Repeat Problem 6.10 for the ninthorder model of a power system having
two inputs and four outputs. This model is given in Section 5.8, Part 3.
6.12 Repeat Problem 6.10 for the fthorder distillation column considered in
Problem 5.19 with the following output matrices
S
T
US
S
S
Q
R9
S
VRF US
T
S
S
S
H
H
S
Q
R9
6.13 Generalize the orderreduction procedure by the method of singular perturbations, presented in Section 6.3, to the case when the output equation has
the matrix
different from zero.
V
6.14 Write a MATLAB program for nding the transient response settling time.
Hint: See the MATLAB program presented in Example 8.8.
6.15 Write a MATLAB program for nding the transient response rise time.
Hint: First solve Problem 6.14.