Lecture 21 PDF

Lecture 21
Pole Placement Control Design

Dr. Radhakant Padhi
Asst. Professor
Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore

Assumptions:
The system is completely state controllable.
The state variables are measurable and are

available for feedback.
Control input is unconstrained.
ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Dr. Radhakant Padhi, AE Dept., IISc-Bangalore

Objective:
The closed loop poles should lie at
desired locations.
1 , , n , which are their
Difference from classical approach:

Not only the dominant poles, but all poles are forced to lie at
specific desired locations.
Necessary and sufficient condition:
The system is completely state controllable.
Closed Loop System Dynamics
X = AX + BU
The control vector U is designed in the following
state feedback form
U = KX
This leads to the following closed loop system
X = ( A BK ) X = ACL X
where ACL
( A BK )
Philosophy of
The gain matrix K is designed in such a
way that
sI ( A BK ) = ( s 1 )( s 2 )
where 1 ,
( s n )
, n are the desired pole locations.

Pole Placement Design Steps:

Method 1 (low order systems, n 3)
z
Check controllability
Define K = [ k1 k2 k3 ]
Substitute this gain in the desired

characteristic polynomial equation
sI A + B K = ( s 1 )
(s n )
Solve for k1 , k2 , k3 by equating the like

powers on both sides
Pole Placement Control Design:

Method 2
X = AX + Bu
u = K X ,
K = [ k1 k2
kn ]
Let the system be in first companion (controllable canonical) form

0
0
A=
0
an
an1 an2
an3
0
0
0
0

,B =

1
0
1
a1

After applying the control, the closed loop system

dynamics is given by
X = ( A BK ) X = ACL X
1
0
0
0
0
1
ACL =
0
0
0
a n a n 1 a n 2
0
1
0
0
0
0
ACL =
0
0
( an k1 ) ( an 1 k2 )
0 0
0 0

1
0 0

a1 k1
0 0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
k2
0
k3
0

a
k
( 1 n )
0
0
k n
(1)

Method 2
If 1 , , n are the desired poles. Then the desired
characteristic polynomial is given by,
( s 1 ) ( s n ) = s n + 1 s n 1 + 2 s n 2 + +
This characteristic
polynomial, will lead to
the closed loop system
matrix as
ACL =
State space form
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0

n 2
n 1
n

0
0
( 2)

Method 2
Comparing Equation (1) and (2), we arrive at:
an + k1 = n k1 = (n an )

a
k
a
+
=
=
n
1
2
n
1
2
n
1
n 1 )

a1 + kn = 1 kn = (1 a1 )
K = ( a )
( Row vector form)
10
What if the system is not given

in the first companion form?
Define a transformation
X = TX
X = T 1 X
X = T 1 ( AX + Bu )
X = T 1 AT X + T 1B u
Design a T such that T-1AT will be in first companion form.

Select
where
T = MW
M
B AB
An1B is the controllability matrix

11

Method 2
an 1
a
n2
W =
a1
1
an 2
a1
1
0
1
0
Next, design a controller for the transformed system (using the

technique for systems in first companion form).
u = K X = ( K T
)X = KX
Note: Because of its role in control design as well as the use of M

(Controllability Matrix) in the process, the first companion
form is also known as Controllable Canonical form.
12

Method 2: Bass-Gura Approach
z
z
z
z
Check the controllability condition

Form the characteristic polynomial for A
| sI A |= s n + a1s n 1 + a2 s n 2 + + an 1s + an
find ais
Find the Transformation matrix T
Write the desired characteristic polynomial
( s 1 ) ( s n ) = s n + 1s n1 + 2 s n2 + + n
and determine the is
The required state feedback gain matrix is
K = [( n an ) ( n 1 an 1 )
(1 a1 )] T 1
13

Method 3 (Ackermanns formula)
Define A = A BK
desired characteristic equation is
sI ( A BK ) = ( s 1 )
( s n )
| sI A |= s n + 1s n 1 + 2 s n 2 +
+ n 1s + n = 0
Caley-Hamilton theorem states that every matrix A

satisfies its own characteristic equation
( A) = An + 1 An1 + 2 An2 +
+ n 1 A + n = 0
For the case n = 3 consider the following identities.

14

Method 3: (Ackermanns formula)
Multiplying the identities in order by 3, 2, 1 respectively and
adding we get
.(1)
From Caley-Hamilton Theorem for A

And also we have for A

15

Substituting ( A) and ( A) in equation (1) we get
Since system is completely controllable inverse of the controllability

matrix exists we obtain
(2)
16

Pre multiplying both sides of the equation (2) with [0 0 1]
For an arbitrary positive integer n ( number of states)

Ackermanns formula for the state feedback gain
matrix K is given by
K = [0 0 0
1 ] B
AB
w h e re ( A ) = A n + 1 A n 1 +
A B
A B
+ n 1 A + n I
n 1
( A)
i ' s a re th e c o e ffic ie n ts o f th e
d e s ire d c h a ra c te ris tic p o ly n o m ia l
17
Choice of closed loop poles :

Guidelines
z
Do not choose the closed loop poles far away

from the open loop poles, otherwise it will
demand high control effort
Do not choose the closed loop poles very

negative, otherwise the system will be fast
reacting (i.e. it will have a small time constant)
In frequency domain it leads to large bandwidth, and

hence noise gets amplified
18

Guidelines
z
Use Butterworth polynomials

n +1
2n
n +1
( j ( 2 k + 1) )
s
2n
= e
(
) = ( 1)
k = 0,1, 2 - -
wo
1
w o = a constant (like " natural frequency")
n = system order (num ber of closed loop poles)

choose only stable poles.
Im
Example: 1
let n = 1 only one pole
use k = 1
-0
s=0 (cos + j sin ) = 0

Re
19

Guidelines
Example 2:
Let n = 2 we know ( cos + j sin ) m =( cos m + j sin m )
n+1 3
=
2n
4
Im
S2
s = 0 [cos ( (2 k + 1)3 / 4 ) + j sin ( (2 k + 1)(3 / 4) )]
Im
S1
Re
k = 0 s1 = 0 [cos ( 3 / 4 ) + j sin ( (3 / 4) )]
stabilizing: acc ep t .
Re
k = 1 s 2 = 0 [cos ( 9 / 4 ) + j sin ( (9 / 4) )]
Re
Destabiliz i ng: reject.

k = 2 s 3 = 0 [cos (15 / 4 ) + j sin ( (15 / 4) )]Im
Im
S3
Re
Destabilizing: reject.
k = 3 s 4 = 0 [cos ( 21 / 4 ) + j sin ( (21 / 4 ) )]
S4
stabilizi ng: accept .

20

21
Example: Inverted Pendulum
0
20.601
A=
0
0.4905
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1 0 0 0
; B = ;C =
0
1
0
1
0
0

0
0.5

22
Step 1: Check controllability
Rank = 4 ; Controllable
M 0
Hence, the system is controllable.

23
Step 2: Form the characteristic equation and get ais

24
Step 3: Find Transformation T = MW and its inverse

25
Step 4: Find is from desired poles 1 , 2 , 3 , 4

26
Step 5: Find State Feed back matrix K and input u

27
Time Simulation: Inverted Pendulum

28

Guidelines
z
Do not choose the closed loop poles far away

from the open loop poles. Otherwise, it will
demand high control effort.
Do not choose the closed loop poles very

negative. Otherwise, the system will be fast
reacting (i.e. it will have a small time constant)
In frequency domain it leads to a large bandwidth,
which in turn leads to amplification of noise!
29
Multiple input systems

z
The gain matrix is not unique even for

fixed closed loop poles.
Involved (but tractable) mathematics
X = AX + BX
U = KX
k11 k12
K =
k m1 k m 2
k1 n
k mn

30
Multiple input systems:

Some tricks and ideas
z
Eliminate the need for measuring some xj by appropriately

choosing the closed loop poles.
E xam ple :
u = 1 x1 + ( 2 ) x 2
select 2 = provided < 0

z
z
z
Relate the gains to proper physical quantities

x
ux g11 0 g13 0 y
u =
x
0
0
g
g
y
22
24
Shape eigenvectors: Eigen structure assignment control

Introduce the idea of optimality: optimal control
31
Control Allocation:

32
References
z
K. Ogata: Modern Control Engineering,

3rd Ed., Prentice Hall, 1999.
B. Friedland: Control System Design,

McGraw Hill, 1986.

33

34

Lecture 21 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Lecture 21 PDF

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

Lecture 21 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture 21

Pole Placement Control Design

Pole Placement Control Design

The system is completely state controllable.

The state variables are measurable and are

Control input is unconstrained.

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Control Design

1 , , n , which are their

Difference from classical approach:

Closed Loop System Dynamics

, n are the desired pole locations.

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Design Steps:

Substitute this gain in the desired

Solve for k1 , k2 , k3 by equating the like

Pole Placement Control Design:

Let the system be in first companion (controllable canonical) form

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

After applying the control, the closed loop system

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Control Design:

polynomial, will lead to

the closed loop system

State space form

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Control Design:

What if the system is not given

Design a T such that T-1AT will be in first companion form.

An1B is the controllability matrix

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Control Design:

Next, design a controller for the transformed system (using the

Note: Because of its role in control design as well as the use of M

Pole Placement Design Steps:

Check the controllability condition

Pole Placement Design Steps:

Caley-Hamilton theorem states that every matrix A

For the case n = 3 consider the following identities.

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Design Steps:

From Caley-Hamilton Theorem for A

ADVANCED CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN

Pole Placement Design Steps:

Since system is completely controllable inverse of the controllability

Pole Placement Design Steps:

For an arbitrary positive integer n ( number of states)

Choice of closed loop poles :

Do not choose the closed loop poles far away

Do not choose the closed loop poles very

In frequency domain it leads to large bandwidth, and

Choice of closed loop poles :

Use Butterworth polynomials

w o = a constant (like " natural frequency")

n = system order (num ber of closed loop poles)

s=0 (cos + j sin ) = 0

Choice of closed loop poles :

Destabiliz i ng: reject.