obtain an over-ah desirable transfer func­

Discrete Compensation of Sampled-Data tion. This procediu-e is, at best, apphca-

ble to systems whose time constants are
greater than the samphng period and
and Continuous Control Systems whose effective damping ratio is relatively
large. B y so restricting the original sys­
tems, the authors assume that the re­
ELIAHU I. JURY W I L L I A M SCHROEDER sponse between samphng instants will be
ASSOCIATE MEMBER AIEE STUDENT MEMBER AIEE
well behaved. Once the design is com­
pleted, however, the system must be ana­
lyzed by some altogether different method
to determine the vahdity of this assump­
Synopsis: T h i s paper presents a m e t h o d of the control system designer and should be
compensation t o b e applied t o c o n t i n u o u s tion. Should the response between sam­
recognized as very useful also to the
as well as t o s a m p l e d - d a t a s y s t e m s w h i c h phng instants be unacceptable, then no
reduces t o zero a n y o v e r s h o o t or error after
designer of any other particular type of
method is outlined for the improvement
a prescribed finite t i m e . T h i s prescribed "system."
of the system. The interesting contribu­
response is applicable t o step or ramp inputs The hterature contains a wealth of in­
tion of Bergen and Ragazzini is that an
and could b e e x t e n d e d t o acceleration or formation for the compensation of con­
higher order inputs. I t is s h o w n t h a t this over-all desirable transfer function is se­
tinuous hnear systems b y the use of hnear
response c a n be accomplished using t h e lected as the objective, rather than any
modified z-transform^ which yields t h e networks or devices. Nonhnear com­
set of frequency response characteristics,
system response for all i n s t a n t s of t i m e . pensation is presently undergoing inten­
which is essentially synthesis in the time
The procedure, illustrated in e x a m p l e s , is sive research. Synthesis of inherent
applicable t o general linear physical s y s t e m s domain.
sampled-data systems and synthesis of
with no inherent delays. T h e c o m p e n s a t e d A second method of compensation using
system m a y be designed s o t h a t shifts in continuous hnear systems using digital
or delay elements is relatively new. This a digital computer as the compensating
gain or other d y n a m i c a l disturbances h a v e
a small effect on t h e prescribed response. paper is concerned with only the last two element has been presented by Salzer.^
In conclusion, t h e m e t h o d presented is types of synthesis and is fiu-ther restricted However, it appears that the problem has
powerful in synthesizing control s y s t e m s t o been unnecessarily complicated by an at­
taUy w i t h a prescribed response a n d further­ to a new method of determining how pre­
viously suggested components may be tempt to apply conventional continuous
more is straightforward in i t s application.
used to greater advantage. system techniques and frequency response
characteristics to sampled-data systems.
Considering the previous work done on
The result of this appears to be that no

T H E over-ah objective of the paper is

to present a useful and straightfor­
ward procediu-e for the synthesis of dis­
sampled-data systems, the most promis­
ing method of analysis appears to be the
modified 2-transform. Modification of
better response can be obtained using the
computer than could have been obtained
by conventional continuous methods. A
crete compensation of fixed linear systems. the 2-transform in order to include in­
second hmitation of Salzer's method is
The term "discrete" is chosen in order to formation at all times was first presented
that experimental trial and error is re­
include the use of either sampling com­ by Barker2 and has been extended b y one
quired to determine the actual compen­
pensators or continuous compensators of the authors.^ The desirable features
sation to be used and to determine the
consisting of a number of pure delay of the modified z-transform as extended
response between sampling instants.
elements. are that the response is defined at ah
The problem of compensating a fixed times, and that the transient response can Considering previous work done on
system so that the step or ramp response be expressed in the form of a contoiu- compensation of continuous systems b y
meets predetermined specifications, integral in the 2-pIane. The evaluation employing delay lines or other elements
namely rise time, overshoot, and settling of this integral can readily be predicted of pure delay, certain procedures and ap­
time, is a familiar one. Transient re­ or obtained and the effects of certain al­ proaches have been presented by several
sponse specifications are chosen, since the terations of the integrand can readily be different authors. However, as in sam­
time response can be readily predicted seen without the evaluation of the inte­ pled-data systems, ah methods seem to
and determined with the aid of modified gral. Thus a powerful tool has been made have rather serious limitations. Recently
2-transforms. ^ Fortunately, these speci­ available for the synthesis of sampled- Sze* has evaluated methods presented b y
fications are common requirements of data and continuous systems. These fea­ other authors and has presented a graph­
control systems. The importance of a tures are not found in any other method ical method of his own. Sze's objec­
straightforward and practical solution of and are the tools to be used in the pro­ tive is to obtain a close approximation of
such a problem needs no elaboration for cedure presented in this paper. e—^* as the over-ah transfer function
Analysis b y the impulse response since this is probably the next best thing
method,3 or b y other methods, may be to the normally physically impossible
P a p e r 5 6 - 6 4 4 , r e c o m m e n d e d by t h e A I E E F e e d b a c k more or less laborious, depending upon transfer function of one. Earlier authors
Control Systems C o m m i t t e e and approved by t h e
A I E E C o m m i t t e e o n T e c h n i c a l O p e r a t i o n s for the particular system. However, they aU in this field also selected this same objec­
p r e s e n t a t i o n a t t h e A I E E S u m m e r a n d Pacific tive, which, incidentally, is closely related
G e n e r a l M e e t i n g , S a n F r a n c i s c o , Calif., J u n e 2 5 - 2 9 , have the disadvantage of being difl&cult
1956. Manuscript submitted J a n u a r y 3, 1956; to apply to synthesis. Analysis and syn­ with Bergen and Ragazzini's approach
m a d e a v a i l a b l e for p r i n t i n g April 17, 1956.
thesis with the 2-transform, unmodified, since the z-transform of ^* is 2 ~ ^ The
E L I A H U I . J U R Y is w i t h t h e U n i v e r s i t y of California, hmitations of methods studied by Sze
B e r k e l e y . Calif., a n d W I L L I A M S C H R O E D E R , for­
is practical for some systems, but has the
m e r l y w i t h t h e U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , is n o w w i t h undesirable limitation of yielding the re­ are relatively high gains required for fast
t h e R a m o - W o o l d r i d g e C o r p o r a t i o n , L o s Angeles,
Calif. sponse at the samphng instants only. responses, laborious analytical work for
This research was supported b y t h e United S t a t e s Bergen and Ragazzini^ have jointly pre­ higher order systems, and the severe ef­
Air F o r c e , t h r o u g h t h e Air F o r c e Office of Scientific sented an interesting compensating pro­ fect on the response of very small shifts in
R e s e a r c h , Air R e s e a r c h a n d D e v e l o p m e n t C o m ­
mand, under Contract AF18{600)-1521. cedure using a digital processing unit to gain.

JANUARY 1957 Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems 317


- G*(Z,nn )
r(t) ^ C(n,m)T
r*{t)
G* (z) HOLD
Mathematical Background
It is generally known that the z-trans­
form method offers a useful tool for the
analysis of sampled-data systems, with
the limitations of yielding information
only at the sampling instants. As men­
tioned previously, the z-transforms can be
modified^ so as to yield the complete re­
sponse of a sampled system by inserting
a fictitious delay Δ in the forward path
and, if feedback is used, a negative delay
in the feedback path of the same amount.
B y employing operational calculus tech­
niques, both the z-^ and the modified z-
transforms^ have been extended and the
fohowing expressions for the modified z-
transform have been developed. Refer­
ring to Figs. 1 ^ and reviewing the
modified z-transform,^ one can write the
modified transfer function in the form
G*(z,A)=£lg(t-AT)dT{t)]
>e+ico . featiwe. Also, the reader can determine
l-g"z-i
or let w = 1 — Δ, then
G*(z,m) = e-'''£lgit+mT)8T{t)]
G*(z,m)=z G{s)^
1 - Λ -
B y real inversion^
C{n,m)T=—\ C*(z,m)z''-'dz
Λ ^ G*{z,n
Where Γ is a contour which encloses ah
singularities of the integrand. For the
series configuration shown in Fig. 1 , the
output-input relation is
C*{z,m) = R*{z)Gsc*(z)G*{z,m)
and for the over-all feedback system of
Fig. 3,
C*(z,m) = R*(z)—^^^^^^
l + Gc*{z)G*{z)
where G*(s) is G*{z,m) with m equal to
unity.
Equations 5 and 6 are also applicable to
Figs. 2 and 4 respectively, b y replacing
G*(z,w) with Go*(z,w).
Equation 4 can be employed as a most
useful tool. C*(z,m) can readily be ob­
tained by substitution of equations 5 and
318
Fig. 1 . Sampled-
data system with
series compensator
a n d fictitious d e l a y
G(s) A T = (l-m) Τ
C*(z.f
6 and the use of tables. Fiu-thermore,
m is independent of the variable of in­
tegration, and can be treated as a con­
stant in evaluating the integral. Thus
the integral may be evaluated with tables,'
long division,^ or by the sum of the res­
idue. Since w is a continuous variable
within the range 0 ^ w ^ 1 , the usual laws
of differentiation may be applied. Thus
if desired, the maximum response can be
obtained either by equating hClhm to
zero first and then evaluating the integral
or the order of the operations may be
reversed. Although evaluation of the
integral is not generally a difficult task,
other valuable information is obtainable
from the integrand. For instance it
can be shown that if all the terms of the
integrand in Equation 4 which contain
m have singularities at the origin only,
then for all values of η above an obvious
integer, the value of the integral is inde­
pendent of m. This is a most useful
the initial and final value of the response.'
(1) Finahy, since 0 ^ w ^ 1 and since η
may take on an integer value, the com­
plete response at any and all times can
(2) be found by evaluating equation 4 and the
relation
ds
/ = ( « - l - f m ) r
(3) For these reasons the modified z-
transform appears to be superior to any
other tool for the synthesis of systems
employing discrete compensators.
(4)
Development of Theory
A procedure for the compensation of
sampled-data systems wih be presented
first. This same procedure is also ap­
phcable to continuous systems to be com­
(5)
pensated with pure delay elements, as
shown in a later section. The general
configurations shown in Figs. 1 through
4 wih be considered in this paper. It is
(6) reahzed that only the over-all feedback
systems of Figs. 3 and 4 are of primary
interest to the control system designer,
however, examination of equations 5 and
6 reveals that they are of the same form.
Determination of the feedback compen­
sator b y equation 6 requires first a
determination of the quantity G c * ( z ) / 1
+ G c * ( z ) G * ( z ) from which G*(z) may
be determined.
Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of
It should be noted that the quantity
G c * ( z ) / l + G c * ( z ) G * ( z ) corresponds to sim­
ply <^«c*(2) in equation 5. Thus the de­
termination of the feedback compensator
G c * ( z ) yields as a by-product the series
compensator G s c * ( z ) . For this reason,
both a feedback and series system are
designed at the same time, both of which
will have the same response for a step
input. This may be convenient if the
series system merits consideration.
A straightforward approach then to
synthesis with the configurations imder
consideration is first to determine the
quantity Gn*{z). Such a procedure is
presented in this section, first for a step
input and then for a ramp. The proce­
dure could also be generalized to include
acceleration and higher order inputs.
S T E P R E S P O N S E SYNTHESIS
Assume that a fixed hnear system,
either open or closed loop, is available
for some apphcation but its step response
must be improved in order to meet re-
quired transient specifications, Assume
also that the input is available in either
a continuous or periodicahy sampled
form and the system's transfer function.
Figs. 1-4, is of the form:
G{s)^ (8)
where A and Β are constants, (p+l) ^
( 5 + 1 ) , ί is the Laplacian variable, and
all poles are in the left half of the 5-plane,
or at the origin (i.e., stable systems).
The required step response is specified
b y ( 1 ) zero steady-state error, (2) max­
(7)
imum ahowable rise time (3) maximum
ahowable overshoot Mp, and (4) maxi­
miun allowable settling time U. These
quantities are illustrated in Fig. 5 .
The general approach for synthesizing
such a system will be to manipulate the
integrand of the inverse transformation,
equation 4, so that for all η larger than
a fixed integer, the value of the contour
integral is a constant, independent of
η and m. This requires that ah the terms
of the integrand which contain m must
have no contribution to the contour
integration. The effect of this require­
ment is to cause the output to be flat
or independent of time for all time greater
than a fixed period.
A detailed procedure follows.
Step L If it is feasible to reduce the
effective order of the original system
by conventional methods, this will gen­
erahy be desirable because it wih result
in a simpler compensator. This is not
a necessary requirement and merely
offers the designer additional freedom
in obtaining the desired response.
Systems JANUARY 1957
 -G*(Z.nn)
- G (Z.m )

-G (S)

C(n,m)T
r (t) HOLD G(S) ΔΤ
C(n,nn)T C*(z,m)
- l l l l A j G ; (Z) HOLD G(S) ΔΤ
C*(z.m)

-ΔΤ

Fig. 2 . S a m p l e d - d a t a system w i t h series c o m p e n s a t o r a n d fictitious d e l a y Fig. 3 . S a m p l e d - d a t a c o n t r o l system w i t h c o m p e n s a t o r Gc*(z) a n d ficti­

tious d e l a y s

Step 2. Choose the period of the sam­ The constant multiplier and the de­ overshoot, depending upon the pole-
pler to satisfy the relation nominator are chosen so that the product zero location. If the overshoot is un­
of equations 10 and 11 is unity for ζ equal acceptable, then it can be reduced by re­
tr
T = to unity. This satisfies the condition that ducing the imaginary part of the most
iP+L)
the steady-state error is zero by the final effective complex roots.
where tr is the specified rise time and value theorem.^ (If evaluation of the
Step 6. After determining a Gsc*(z)
ip+L) is as defined by equation 8. The inverse transformation by long division^
which yields a satisfactory response,
justification for this choice is contained in rather than by contour integration is
evaluate Gc*(z) from equation 12. This
equation 4 and will be further clarified in preferred, it can be seen that the coeffi­
completes the procedure for determining
step 4. cient of terms beyond wih be
the pulsed transfer function of the feed­
Step 3, With the use of t a b l e s / find independent of m.) It is important to
back compensator. The response of a
G*(z,m), Fig. 1 or 3; the modified z- note that the poles of G*(z,m) are inde­
series system with a compensator Gsc*(z)
transform of [G(s) (l-e~''')/s]. For pendent of m and can therefore be
will be identical to the response of the
systems whose G(s) is of the form of cancelled by Gsc*(2). Equahy important
feedback system, and vice versa, by equa­
equation 8, G*(z,m) wih be of the form is the fact that the zeros are functions
tion 4.
of m and any attempt to cancel them wih
z-1 1 ΦΡΜ
Illustrative Example: T o illustrate
G*(z,m)- only result in the addition of undesirable
the simphcity and accuracy of the fore­
ζ i(z-ir^''^(z-ir^ poles. This is a hmitation of the ap­
going procedure a simple example wih be
φι(ηι) ψ(ηΐ,ζ) proach of Bergen and Ragazzini* which
z-1 + (z-ri). . .(z-rL)J
(10)
cannot be seen unless applying the modi­
considered. The compensation of higher
order systems can be performed in the
fied 2-transform, Condition 4 requires
where p and L are as in equation 8, same manner, once G(s) is expressed in a
that the order of the numerator in ζ
c is a constant, φ (m) and ψ(ιη,ζ) are partial fraction expansion.
be no larger than the order of the denom­
functions of m, and τχ. .r^ are necessarily Assume the initial system is defined
inator, which requires the introduction
in the unit circle of the 2-plane since b y a linear differential equation of second
of poles at the origin.
G(s) is stable.7 order, the transfer function of which is
By equations 5 and 6, G(s) = ca/s(s+2a) where c and a are both
Step 4. Choose Gsc*{z) so that: (1)
Gsc*(z) > 0 , and the desired step response is speci­
ah poles of terms of G*(z,m) which con­ Gc*{z)- (12)
l-Gsc*(z)G*{z) fied b y / , = 1, Μ ρ = 0, and the steady-state
tain m are cancelled; (2) no new poles
error equal to zero. In general, tr is
other than at the origin in the 2-plane from which Gc*(z) is realizable if Gse*(z) arbitrary except tr>0.
are introduced; (3) the steady-state is realizable. The desired response can be obtained
error is zero; and (4) Gsc'^iz) is physically
Step 5. Obtain the complete step by either leaving the poles of G(s) as
reahzable. If conditions 1 and 2 are
response b y evaluating equation 4, as they are, or by shifting them prior to
met, then it can be seen from equation 4
the following applying this method. If the poles
that for ah (p-\-L-{-1) the response wih
are unchanged, then by employing step
be independent of both η and m (flat). [l/2Trj frz/z-lGsc*(z)G*(z,m)z''-'dz] 2, Τ is chosen to be one half. From
This must be true since for ah η ^ (/>-h
which wih be very simple to do by the sum tables, 1 the modified 2-transform is the
L + 1 ) , ah terms containing m wih have
of the residues, by long division, or with equation
no singularities and the residue of
z ' ' - V ( 2 - l ) 2 ^ + ^ is unity. This is the tables since poles exist at the origin and c 2—1 1 m—a
essential feature of the procedure and at unity only. From the complete re­
4 ζ \_{ζ—ΐγ 2—1
is also the justification of step 2. The sponse the maximiun can readily be de­
effect of conditions 1 and 2 may be more termined and compared with the allow­ (13)
readily seen if the following general able Mp. An unacceptable overshoot
expression of Gsc*{z), which satisfies presents the only possibihty of the speci­
fications being unsatisfied, since tr and and employing step 4, the transfer func­
all four conditions, is examined in re­
lation with equations 4 and 10. ts wih be satisfied. If the poles of G(s) tion Gsc*{z) is
are all real and if the order of the denom­ 4 ( 2 - l ) ( 2 - 0
Gsc*{z) = inator is at least two larger than the Gsc\z)=- (14)
c (I-O22
1 (z-mz-ri)(z-r2)...(z-rL) order of the numerator then the overshoot
c ( l - r O ( l - r 2 ) ( l - r 3 ) . . .(1-ri)^^^-^^^ will be zero. If G(s) contains complex The step response is given by real inver­
(11) poles, then there may or may not be an sion^

JANUARY 1957 Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems 319

 G; (Z.m) tained for all signals. This is character­
istic of linear systems. The settling time
can, however, be made as smah as de­
-Go(S) sired for a system of any order, provided
that the system can withstand the re­
quired signal amphtude.
r (t) C(n,m)T
Second, compensation of higher order
Κ Χ > — ^ 1 G* (Z) L HOLD G(S) ΔΤ
C*(z.m) system may resuh in undesirable over­
shoots. This will necessitate shifting
the roots of the original system by con­
-ΔΤ
ventional methods and this may be
difficult. This same problem would gen­
Fi3. 4 . M u l t i l o o p s a m p l e d - d a t a system w i t h c o m p e n s a t o r Gc*(z) a n d fictitious d e l a y s
erally arise, however, if any other method
of feedback compensation were used.

R A M P R E S P O N S E SYNTHESIS
1
C(n.m)r=—X Cn...^ll-e-\l-a-^-e-^-a-^]
27Γ7 1-e-^ Assume the problem to be the same

X = 1.0 (23) as for a step input except that the speci­

[R*{z)Gsc*(z)G*(z,m)z''-']dz
j _ Γ Γ ( ζ - ΐ ) ( 2 - θ Ί
2'r;JRL (l-e-')z^
L(z-l)* z-l
Evaluating' equation 15
values of «,
« = 0, C = 0
n = \, C = ( m - a - i + a - i g - « ' ^ )
n = 2, C=l-e-%m-a-^-
n>S, C=1.0
Note that for ah w>2, (/> 1, b y equation 7,
since the period is one half), the error is
zero as specified. T o determine the
maximum response during the first and
second periods, equate the partial de­
rivatives of equations 17 and 18 to zero
respectively.
dC
« = 1, — = 0 = 1-^-'^'^
Om
Solving for m from equation 20 yields a
value of m equal to zero. For this value
of w, the response is a minimum. The
maximum response occurs at m equal
unity, that is,
1 1
From equation 21, Cm«x is less than unity
for ah a larger than zero. Simharly,
during the second period.
n = 2, ^ = 0 = - ^ - " + ^ - ' " "
om
Solving for m from equation 22 yields a
value of m equal to unity. This value
of m yields the maximum response,
Thus Mp equals zero for all positive values
of a. The desired response can there­
fore be obtained with a compensator
given by equations 12 and 14. Solving
Iz""-' dz for Gc*(2),
z-e-"" J in Fig. 8.
(15) 4 In general, either series or feedback
c (1-θ2+(α-ΐ-6-''-α-ΐβ-'')
for integer
(24)
(16) The compensated system is shown in
Fig. 6 and the step response of the com­
pensated and uncompensated system is
-a (17)
1-e shown in Fig. 7. From equation 24,
it is noticed that the compensator must
store only one previous input and one
1
(18) previous output. As mentioned earlier
1-e - a
in this part, the procedure also yields a
(19) series system with the same response,
should this system be of interest. The
series compensator is given by equation
14 and requires the storage of two previ­
ous inputs and no previous outputs.
The fohowing merits and limitations
of the procedure are recognized. First a
flat response of zero overshoot after a
prescribed finite time is obtainable.
This cannot be done using linear compen­
(20)
sation of similar systems and is physically
difficult using nonlinear compensation.
A second advantage is that the de­
signer has a large degree of freedom in
obtaining the desired response. Only
two basic configurations have been con­
sidered in this paper but there is no
reason w h y the modified z-transform
(21) cannot be used equally well for more
comphcated configurations."
Third, the response to any other input
can be determined exactly, and it is
possible to obtain a ramp response
which has no ripple but has a constant
(22) steady-state error, as shown in Fig. 7.
The method also has limitations.
First, since the rise time and settling
time are independent of single amplitude,
the fastest possible response is not ob-
fied zero steady-state error, maximum
allowable overshoot Mp, maximum allow­
able rise time /r, and maximum settling
time ts are ah with respect to a ramp
input. These quantities are illustrated
compensation m a y be used. The ap­
proach wih be to manipulate the inte-
grade of equation 4 so that for all η
larger than a fixed integer, the value of
the integral wih be T(n—l+m) for a
unit ramp input. This requires in part
that ah the terms of the integrand which
contain m, except the term mT/z— 1, must
have no contribution to the contour inte­
gration. Such a procedure is outlined
in the fohowing.
Step 1. Choose a first-order hold*
circuit if the system does not have a pole
at the origin in the 5-plane. If the system
does have a simple or multiple pole at
the origin, then the designer is free to
use either a zero order hold or remove the
poles and use a first-order hold. The
best choice will depend on the number of
factors other than desired response.
Step 2. Choose the period of the
sampler so that
tr
(25)
P+L+1
where tr is the specified rise time and
(p+L) is the order of Gis).
Step 5. With tables, find G*(z,m),
the modified z-transform of G(s) X
l-e-'^'/s or G{s) X [(l-e-*^)2-
(A/s+l/Ts^)], depending upon the order
of the hold circuit.
Step 4. Choose Gsc*(z) so that: (1)
ah poles of terms of G*(z,m) that contain
m are cancelled if a zero order hold is
used and all except a first-order pole at
unity are cancelled if a first order hold
is used; (2) no new poles other than at

320 Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems JANUARY 1 9 5 7

the origin are introduced; ( 3 ) one ad­
justable constant exists or is introduced
so that the steady-state error can be
made zero for all ramps; Gse*iz) is
physically reahzable. Condition 1 and
2 will cause the response to have the same
steady-state rate as the input but with
a constant lag, depending on the system.
As with the step input this can be seen
by examining equation 4 . In order to
make the error be zero, some arbitrary
constant must be introduced either in the
compensator or the hold circuit. If a
zero order hold is used, then the constant
may be introduced as an additional zero
in Gsc*(z) and if a first-order hold is
used it may be introduced in the hold
circuit.
Step 5 . Obtain the complete response
and evaluate the arbitrary constant for
zero error. Determine the maximum
overshoot, and if unacceptable, again it
can systematically be reduced (to zero
if necessary) by decreasing the imagi­
nary part of the effective complex roots.
Step 6. Solve for Gc*{z) from equation
12.
An ihustrative example is given in the
Appendix.
The procedure for obtaining a specified
ramp response has the same merits as the
step response procedure with the addition
of being able to obtain zero error, zero
overshoot, and finite settling time for a
ramp input.
However, the procedure also has ad­
ditional limitations.
The first is that a system without an
integrator must receive an unhmited
signal if it is to fohow a ramp indefinitely.
This may be acceptable if the ramp inputs
are restricted in time and amplitude so
that the system wih not reach saturation
or if the original system is itself a closed
loop system and the forward transfer
function has a pole at the origin. This
limitation is also true of any other
method of compensation and it should be
noted that only a first-order integrator is
required to avoid this difficulty.
The second hmitation is that both zero
error and zero overshoot cannot be ob­
tained simultaneously for step and ramp
iliputs. The ramp procedure automati-
cahy insures that the system will have
zero steady-state error and the same set­
tling time for both step and ramp inputs.
However, the transient overshoot to a
step input may be as much as 1 0 0 per
cent for a system which has zero ramp
overshoot. T h e step overshoot can be
made as small as desired (but not zero)
by decreasing the period and adding addi­
tional zeros to the compensator.'
JANUARY 1 9 5 7 Jury,
A less serious limitation might be the
difficulty in realizing the first-order hold,
should it be required. Although not as
simple as the zero order hold, it is certainly
physicahy realizable and should not
present any serious problem.
Compensation of Continuous
Systems with Pure Delay Elements
T h e step and ramp procedures pre­
sented in the preceding sections are ap-
TIME — -
phcable to sampled-data systems. This
Fig. 5. S t e p response quantities
section of the paper whl be concerned with
the use of these same procedures (with
limitations) to the synthesis of con­ ihustrate the step response synthesis,
tinuous systems compensated with pure except that the input is available con­
delay elements. tinuously. Since only series compensa­
First consider Figs. 9 and 1. The two tion is to be considered, the original sys­
systems will have exactly the same re­ tem will first be made a closed loop sys­
sponse to a step input if the period of the tem. If the gain is adjusted so that the
sampler is Δι, Gsc*{z) is the 2-transform imaginary part of the complex roots is
of the pure delay compensator, and if the π / Γ ( Γ = 1 ) , a sampled system whose
hold circuit is a zero order. This must
be true since the input t o G(s) wih be
Gsc^z)^ (26)
exactly the same for both systems. Like­
wise the responses of the two systems to
wih yield the desired response. T o obtain
a ramp input will be identical if the hold
the desired equivalent continuous sys­
circuit accurately converts a sampled
tem, simply remove the hold circuit and
ramp into a continuous ramp. The
sampler and replace Gsc*{z) with G(e'^).
transfer function of such a circuit is e*^
Therefore,
{l — e~^^y/Ts^ which can easily be de­
duced from the Laplace transform of a
sampled ramp^ Te-"''/(l-e"'y, The (27)
Gie'-^y-
fact that such a hold circuit may not be
physically realizable is of no consequence, This continuous system, shown in Fig.
since the sampled system shown in Fig. 1 1 0 , wih have the same step response as a
is to be used only as a mathematical sampled system with a Gsc*(z) given b y
equivalence of the continuous system. equation 2 6 and a zero order hold. The
I t should be noted that the sampled sys­ ramp response can be obtained by deter­
tem is equivalent for a particular input mining the ramp response of a sampled
only, once the hold circuit has been speci­ system with the same Gsc*(z), but with a
fied. For any other output, a different hold chcuit whose transfer function is
hold must be considered in order for the e'^(l-e'''^)/Ts\ Such an equivalent
systems to be equivalent. system is shown in Fig. 1 1 . T o obtain
Therefore, if the problem is to com­ the ramp response, first obtain G*{z,m)
pensate a fixed system so that the step as follows:
or ramp response will meet prescribed
specifications, as assumed in the previous 2a
sections, then the designer can use the (2-1)^ 1 π«+α*,
procedures presented for determining G^z.m)-
L(2-l)« z-1
Gsc*{z)y with two exceptions. First, a
zero order hold must be used for a pre­ cos mir —
scribed step response and a hold circuit 2a 2a7> (28)
whose transfer function is e*''(l—e~*^)V
Ts^ must be used if a specified ramp re­
Then b y equation 4 ,
sponse is desired. Second, only series
compensation can be used, since a hold
C(w,m)r = —
circuit which reproduces the sampled ^TCJ
error exactly is difficult to find.
After Gs*{z) has been determined, the R*{z)Gsc*{z)G^*Mz''-Hz (29)
configuration of delay elements can be
obtained simply by substituting e*^ for z, Evaluating for integer values for η
IUustrative Example: Consider the
same problem and system as used to n=0, C=0 (30)
Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems 321
 Fig. 6 . C o m p e n s a t e d s e c o n d - o r d e r system

2a 2a moved. An approximate method for the

= 1,C= ;+- synthesis of continuous over-all feedback
•2+α
systems has been devised and wih be pre­

2aw
2a
sin rnir
)] (31) sented in a later report.
If the series procedure is compared with
Fig. 8 . R a m p response quantities

Sze's method^ of series compensation, the

« ^ 2 , C= — - f w —-
This response, with the step response, is
shown in Fig. 12.
Compensation of continuous systems
with real delay elements b y the above
procedure has several desirable features,
in addition to the advantages of the pro­
cedures for sampled systems. One of
these is simphcity of realization. N o
hold or sampler is required and the com­
pensation should not be difficult for elec­
tromechanical systems. Tape recorders
or other types of magnetic storage are
possible and advantage could be taken
of the current research for real delay ele­
ments. A second advantage is that step
response of a system which has been S3m-
thesized for a zero error ramp response is
superior to the step response of a sampled
system.
T h e main disadvantage of the pro­
cedure is that it is not apphcable to the
synthesis of over-aU feedback systems.
Series compensation requires that the
compensator must be as precise as the de­
sired response, and that any integration
in the original system must first be re-
,-fn-2 (32)
outstanding advantage of the foregoing
procedure is that the compensated system
can be made much less critical to shifts in
the dynamics of the original system or
shifts in gain. Sze obtains a fast rise time
and a flat response thereafter b y applying
large positive signals followed b y com­
parable negative signals. The response
of such a system will, in general, be more
sensitive t o shifts in roots than wih a sys­
tem whose input is always positive. This
is discussed in the fohowing section.
Discussion of Asstunptions
The transfer function of the compensa­
tor is chosen so that certain undesirable
poles of the original system are cancehed.
In any physical system, it is reahzed that
these poles wih never be cancehed
exactly, and therefore an investigation of
the effect of imperfect cancellation should
be made for each compensated system
under consideration. Again, the modified
z-transform is a usefid tool since the com­
plete response can be found for any pole-
zero configuration.
As pointed out in references 11 and 12,
imperfect cancehation of a pole either
outside, on, or near the unit circle in the z-
plane can result in an unstable system.
Therefore the compensator should never
be required exactly to cancel a pole in
this region of the z-plane. If the original
system is stable, as assumed in the sec­
tion on development of theory, then the
modified z-transform can have no poles
outside the unit circle. However, if the
original system has a multiple pole at the
origin in the 5-plane, G*(z,m) wih have
multiple poles at 1 in the z-plane. If
the procedure of the afore-mentioned sec­
tion for a step input is apphed directly,
at least one of these poles wih require
cancellation. Cancehation should not be
attempted however, since imperfect can­
cellation can result in an unstable system.
This difficulty can be circumvented in
either of the fohowing ways and possibly
others.
1. The order of integration of the original
system may be reduced to one or zero with a
continuous feedback loop. The resulting
system must be stable, otherwise there will
be a pole outside the unit circle requiring
cancellation. A single order of integration
gives no difficulty for a zero error step
response, as noticed from the first example
and equation 25.

ψ
2. The multiple integration can be retained
and the system compensated for zero error

\
I 2 for a ramp or higher order input so that the
multiple integration is utilized. This will
10
STEP ATED
result in an overshoot for step inputs. The
INPUT
r / step overshoot can be reduced by adding

ftβ
additional zeros to the compensator but this

Μ >
increases the complexity of the compen­
sator.
A
r
^ 0 6
//.9
Imperfect cancellation of poles inside
^ 0 4
the unit circle in the z-plane can cause
undesirable responses even though the

0 2

β
/ 1 1
system remains stable. This is particu­
larly true of series compensation, where
imperfect cancehation results in both a
0810 0 6 10 0 4 1.0 Q 2 10 0810 0.6 ω transient and steady-state error. The
- n = 2 - -n=3 - n ^ 5 - -n = 6 - error or effect of the noncancellation wih
Fis. 7. Response of compensated be considerably less if the output of the
0 5 1 0 15 20 2 5 3 0
T I M E s e c o n d - o r d e r system s h o w n i n F i g . 6 compensator is a series of positive steps or

322 Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems JANUARY 1 9 5 7

 PURE DELAY COMPENSATOR Fig. 9 . Continuous Cc*(z)
system c o m p e n s a t e d
with pure delay ele­
ments
' bo+biZ-^+b2Z~^+bzZ-^-\-b4Z-*

— - f - 2 - 2 - 2 + - 2 - 3 - 1 - - 2 - *
ki ki k\ ki ki ki

bo bl b2 . . bz 64 .
H--2-l-f-2-2-1---2-3-f--Z-*
Oo OQ bo Oo

(33)
Δ2 IS A N INTEGER MULTIPLE OF Δ,

where ki is the largest of the aj. Solvmg

A . A N D A g A R E PURE DELAYS
for Cc*{z) yields

impulses,^ rather than both positive and With the exception of converting the
negative, for a step input. This would be transfer function into a continuous con­
expected for a system of any order, since figuration of pure delay elements, no men­ ^3 , , ^4 Λ ^ 2 / b l b2 _

the algebraic sum of both positive and
negative quantities will be more affected
by a shift in one of the quantities than
would the simi of only positive quantities.
A series system can therefore be made
less sensitive t o shifts in the system b y
using a compensator whose output is al­
ways positive for a step input.
Over-aU feedback systems have the ad­
vantage of being far less sensitive to i m ­
perfect canceUation than open-loop sys­
tems. So long as the imperfect canceUa­
tion does not cause instability, the steady-
state error for step input will be unaf­
fected. If t h e system as originaUy de­
signed is found t o be too sensitive t o
shifts or drifts resulting in imperfect can­
ceUation, it can generally be made less
sensitive b y the addition of zeros in the
transfer function of the compensating
device and an increase in the sampling
rate. 9
In both the step and ramp response
synthesis, it was tacitly assumed that the
period of the sampler could be varied.
If the period cannot be changed and the
desired response cannot be obtained with
the fixed period, it m a y be possible to
reduce the effective order of the system
by adding a minor feedback loop and con­
sidering only the dominant poles.
It has also been assumed that the sys­
tem is linear. Reduction of the rise
time b y reducing the sampling period will
require higher gains and therefore satura­
tion wih result with smaller signals. T h e
effect of saturation has n o t been inves­
tigated but saturation and the maximum
forcing functions which the system com­
ponents can withstand wih limit the rise
times obtainable.
tion has been made of the physical realiza­
tion of the compensator. This problem
can be examined in detail only when a
specific system is under consideration,
therefore only broad general considera­
tions wih be discussed in this paper.
The reahzation of the required pulse
transfer function offers considerable free­
dom, even if only electric systems are con­
sidered. There appears t o be a t least
three different approaches t o the problem
and each approach offers a large degree of
freedom.
First, a n y transfer function whose nu­
merator and denominator is a rational
polinomial in z, with the denominator of
equal or higher order than the numerator,
can be realized with pure delay elements,
voltage dividers, t w o algebraic summing
devices, and t w o amplifiers. (If the
sampler and hold are considered as a part
of the compensator, then these elements
wiU also be required. If the system is
originaUy a sampled one, then these ele­
ments wiU be required or present even if
the system is not compensated.) The ar­
rangement of configuration and the value
of the elements is apparent if the output
of the compensator is equated to the al­
gebraic sum of previous outputs and i n ­
puts. A s an example, consider the fol­
lowing:
Fig. 1 0 .
Cc*(z) (34)
where is the largest of the bt. B y
factoring out the largest coeflidents ki
and kt, aU others are less than unity and
therefore only t w o amplifiers wiU be re­
quired. One configuration is then as
shown in Fig. 13. T h e sampler m a y be
placed on either end. If it is in the input,
the delay must be nearly exact integers
of the samphng period Τ since the pulses
must be synchronized upon arrival at the
summing devices. Likewise the amph­
fiers m a y be altered in position, depending
upon the desired summing level. The ap­
proach is not restricted t o electric sys­
tems, and the delays may, of course, be
reahzed in either a digital or analogue
method or combination of both.
A second approach is to consider the
realization as a computing problem since
the 2-transfer function can be considered
a computing program. A digital com­
puter with a set program could therefore
be used, but this m a y or m a y not be
economicaUy feasible. An alternate solu­
tion would be the design of a computer,
either digital or analogue, which has the
desired fixed program. The essential fea­
ture of such a compensator is that it must
C o m p e n s a t e d continuous system

Realization of the Discrete

Compensator T=l
C{n.m)T
The preceding sections have been con­ Τ

cerned primarily with the determination

H O L D
of the transfer function of the compensa­
tor in order to obtain a desirable response. Fig. 1 1 . S a m p l e d - d a t a e q u i v a l e n t o i F i g . 1 0 for a ramp I n p u t

JANUARY 1957 Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems 323


-
-
^ 2 . 0
-
/
ο 1.6
- ing the sensitivity to shifts have been out­
- 1 . 2
STEP
INPU
'/
/ /
STEP
Ό.8 r A method of the physical implementa­
0 4
// r
1 1
-n=2-
2 0
TIME
contain some facility for the memory of
storage of previous quantities and must
be able to handle or process this informa­
tion so that the output is the sum of
properly weighted quantities. Since the
computing field is rapidly expanding,
^vith an increasing nimiber of devices for
storing and handhng information, the
designer enjoys wide freedom in actual
physical realization of the compensator.
A third approach to the reahzation is to
make use of the existing tables of 2-trans-
Forms and thereby obtain a corresponding
Laplace transfer function. B y synthesiz­
ing a network which has the desired La­
place transfer function, the desired z-
transfer function can be realized by
samphng both the input and the output of
the network with synchronized switches.
It m a y or m a y not be possible to obtain
a corresponding Laplace transform which
is physically realizable with a passive
network. Since a large niunber of La­
place transforms can be found which have
the same z-transform and since Laplace
Fis. 1 3 * R e a l i z a t i o n o f discrete c o m p e n s a t o r w i t h p u r e d e l a y s
324
/ Fis. 1 2 . Response o i c o n t i n u o u s
system s h o w n i n Fis. ^ 0
y A few examples on the apphcation of
RESPOrJSE
1 1
n =3 -
3 0
transfer function can generally be reahzed
b y more than one network, again this ap­
proach offers considerable freedom. In
fact, Sklansky^ has presented a detailed
method whereby any physically realiza­
ble ζ transfer function m a y be realized by
a combination of resistance-capacitance
networks, zero order holds, summing or
subtracting devices, constant gain ampli­
fiers, and possibly pure delay elements.
Conclusions
The method of compensation presented
in this report is a powerful tool in synthe­
sizing continuous systems, or sampled-
data feedback systems to yield a pre­
scribed response. The prescribed re­
sponse of zero overshoot and finite set­
tling time is of much importance in the ap­
pHcation of feedback systems. The pro­
cedures discussed in this report are
straightforward and easy to apply for com­
pensating control systems to yield such
responses. They have the advantage of
Τ *
^ Cc(z)
K2
bo
K2
(
_b3.g3Ts
b4 g-4Ts
Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of
prescribing the response for sampled-
data systems for all times and are not
restricted to the samphng instants as has
been attempted before in the literature.
the method have been presented which
ihustrate clearly the procedure steps out­
lined. Furthermore, methods of decreas­
lined* and the effect of these shifts should
not be overlooked.
tion of the compensators is presented which
indicates the ease with which these com­
pensators can be actually constructed.
The same procedure can be extended to
include the compensation of systems with
inherent delays in the forward or feed­
back paths which are not necessarily an
integer value of the samphng period,
furthermore, as mentioned in the section
on compensation of continuous systems,
an approximate method can be devised
whereby continuous systems may be com­
pensated with pure delays in the forward
path of closed loop systems.
The problems which have yet to be
explored are a compromise between rise
time and overshoot by cancelhng only
part of the poles, the effect of noise in the
input, compensation of nonhnear systems,
compensation by employing a variable
pulse width, approximate realization of
the compensator with continuous net­
works, and apphcation of this method to
the effective broadbanding of communica­
tion networks and systems without serious
loss of gain.
Appendix
To illustrate the procedure for obtaining a
desired ramp response, consider the same
system as used to ihustrate the step response
procedure: G{s)=^cals{s-\-2a), tr is unity,
c, a, and tr are arbitrary except greater than
zero. Since the system has a pole at the
origin, a zero order hold and a period of one
third are chosen (steps 1 and 2 ) . By tables/
3
m — --
1
1(ζ-ιη· z-l
3e -2am/Z
(35)
From step 4,
6
The ramp response is given by equation 4,
C(n,m)T=J-, f R*{z)Gsc%z)G*iz,m)z''-'dz
_ 1 Γ {z-e-'^^'Xz+A) ^
2 r 7 J r ( l - e - « « ' ' ) ( l + ^ ) 3
Systems JANUARY 1957
 Γ ST C ( m) Τ
r(t) l-e CO
1 Se-*"' < g ) - X — G*(z) G(s) =
k'-'dz (37) s{s+2a)

Evaluating the output for integer values of η

yields for

w = 0 , 1; C = 0 (38)

n = 2; C X
G* (Z) = -2ατ - 2 α τ
(39) 2a(l-e^°"^)(l+A)z2 ^ 2a(A-e-2''"-Ae'°^)'' z + A ( 3 - 3 e -2ae )
3 ~2o 2a

X -2ατ
(l-e-^'*)(l-f^) I -e
A=
3{l-e"2°'')(U^)-l
( 3 2a)
A 2om/8
(40) 2 4
2a Fig. 1 4 . Compensated second-order ST Ε ρ RESPONSE
system COMF ENSATED S Y *S T E M

\
^ (2+^-^.-'^^^) 2 0

"^^'^~3(l-e-^'»)(l+^)^

\
- 1.6

1.2

r
STEP / I N P lJ T
For zero error, the output must equal the
input, that is c ο8

C=-r(n--14-w) (42) 0.4

3
Equations 41 and 42 yield ^ 11 yi- 1

Ο.ΘΙΟ 0 . 6 1 0 0.4 100.2 08 10 06 10

- η •· 2 - H * n 3
(43) Fig. 1 5 . Response o f c o m p e n s a t e d
3(l-i~"")(l+^) 2a s e c o n d - o r d e r system shown i n F i g . 1 4 0.333 0667 10 1333 1667 2 0

and solving for A from equation 43 gives

3. T H E DESIGN OP SAMPLED-DATA FEEDBACK
- -1 (44) 1 S Y S T E M S , G l a d w y n V . Lago, J o h n G. Truxal.
- ( m + 2 ) (48) AIEE Transactions, vol. 7 3 , p t . I I , N o v . 1954, p p .
3(1-«-*"') 1 247-53.
and solving for the maximum overshoot. 4. SAMPLBD-DATA PROCESSING T E C H N I Q U E S FOR
FEEDBACK CONTROL SYSTEMS, Arthur R . Bergen,
It is noticed from equation 44 that for ah a J o h n R. Ragazzini. Ibid., p p . 2 3 6 - 4 7 .
greater than zero. = 0 (49) 5. SYSTEM COMPENSATION WITH A DIGITAL COM­
PUTER, J. M. Salzer. IRE Convention Record.
I n s t i t u t e of R a d i o Engineers, N e w York, N . Y . .
(45) yields m equal unity for which ilfp is zero. pt. 5 . p p . 1 7 9 - 8 6 .
Thus the desired response can be obtained
6. DELAY LINE COMPENSATION IN OPBN AND
with a Gsc*{z) given by equations 36 and 44. CLOSED LOOP SYSTEMS, T , W , Sze. Ph.D. Dis­
To determine the overshoot Μ during the The transfer function of the compensator sertation, N o r t h w e s t e r n University, E v a n s t o n , III.,
second and third periods, respectively. can be obtained with equation 12, Aug. 1954.
7. ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS OF SAMPLBD-DATA
«=2, Jlf=C—-(1-fm) 12a CONTROL SYSTBMS, Eliahu I. Jury. AIEE Transac­
3 iz-e-^^^^Xz+A) tions, v o l . 7 3 . p t . I , Sept. 1954, p p . 3 3 2 - 4 6 .
c
(50) 8. A D D I T I O N S T O Z - T R A N S F O R M A T I O N T H E O R Y FOR
2a(l-e"^'^)(l+^)z2+ SAMPLED-DATA SYSTEMS, Gladwyn V. Lago.
2^ 2a 1^^_^^^ ^^^^ Ibid., pt. I I , p p . 4 0 3 - 0 8 .
[2a(a-e"*«'«-^e~*«'»)]2+
9. DISCRETE COMPENSATION OF SAMPLED-DAT.\
^(3-3e"*"''-2ae"^'*)
AND CONTINUOUS CONTROL SYSTEMS. E . I. Jury,
W . S c h r o e d e r . Report No. 154, Electronics
To obtain the maximum overshoot, equate which requires storage of two previous Research Laboratory, U n i v e r s i t y of California,
dM inputs and two previous outputs. The Berkeley, Calif., Series 6 0 . 1955.
=0 (47) completed system is shown in Fig. 14 and 10. TABLE OF Z-TRANSFORM AND MODIFIED Z-
dm the step and ramp response are shown in TRANSFORM OF VARIOUS SAMPLBD-DATA SYSTEMS
CONFIGURATIONS, E. I. Jury, G. Farmanfarma.
Fig. 15. iUport No. 136A, Ibid.
which yields A f m a x less than zero for the
second period. Simharly, during the third 11. FACTORS IN THE DESIGN OF DIGITAL CON­

period. TROLLERS FOR S A M P L E D - D A T A F B B D B A C K SYSTBMS,

J o h n E . Bertram. AIEE Transactions, vol. 7 5 . p t .
References 11. July 1956, p p . 1 5 1 - 5 9 .
w = 3, Μ
12. DIGITAL COMPENSATION OF CONTINUOUS-
1. SYNTHESIS A N D CRITICAL STUDY OP SAMPLBD- D A T A F E E D B A C K CONTROL SYSTEMS, K . K . Maitra.

+ DATA CONTROL SYSTEMS, Eliahu I. Jury. AIEE P . E . Sarachik. Ibid., M a y 1956, p p . 1 0 7 - 1 6 .

Transactions, v o l . 7 5 , p t . I I , July 1956, p p . 1 4 1 - 5 1 . 13. NETWORK COMPENSATION OF ERROR SAMPLBD
3 ^ _-iam/Z 2. T H E PULSE TRANSFER FUNCTION AND ITS FEEDBACK CONTROL SYSTEMS, J. Sklansky.
Technical Report T-7fB, D e p a r t m e n t of Electrical
2a APPLICATION TO SAMPLING SBRVOSYSTBMS, R. H .
Engineering, Columbia University, N e w York,
Barker. Proceedings, I n s t i t u t i o n of Electrical
Engineers, L o n d o n , E n g l a n d , v o l . 9 9 , pt. I V . 1 9 5 2 . Ν . Y . , April 1, 1955.

Jury, Schroeder—Discrete Compensation of Systems 325

JANUARY 1 9 5 7