SEI 4123

Applications of Robust Control

1
Knowing Me,
Knowing You…

2
Take a look at this…

3
…and this…

4
…and how about this…

5
…and this…

6
 1. Control System Design-Revisited
Dr. Yahaya 1.1 Open and closed loop control systems.
1.2 Performance evaluations: Time domain and frequency
domain approaches.
1.3 Performance enhancement via root locus and bode
plot approaches.
1.4 Sensitivity of control systems to parameter variations.
Introduction to Matlab/Simulink.
1.5 Control System Design using CAD software – Matlab.

7
 2. Analysis of sensitivity and robustness
Dr. Noh 2.1 Introduction.
2.2 PID, Robust and Optimal Control Issues.
2.3 System sensitivity.
2.4 Analysis of robustness.
2.5 Systems with uncertain parameters.

3. The Design of Robust Control Systems

Dr. Yahaya
3.1 Introduction.
3.2 PID Controllers.
3.3 Design of robust PID controlled systems.
3.4 PID Control of a system with a delay

8
 4. Applications of Robust Control
Dr. Noh 4.1 Case Study 1: Aircraft Autopilot
4.2 Case Study 2: Space Telescope
4.3 Case Study 3: Bobbin Drive

5. Robust Internal Model Control Systems

Dr. Yahaya
5.1 Case Study 1: Design of an internal model control
system.
5.2 Case Study 2: Design of an ultra-precision diamond
turning machine

9
 6. Quantitative Feedback Robust Control System
Dr. Noh 6.1 Quantitative Feedback Theory (QFT).
6.2 Pseudo-QFT Algorithm

7. Robust Control System Using Matlab

Dr. Yahaya
7.1 Case Study 1: Temperature Control System.
7.2 Case Study 2: Disk Drive Read System.

10
 CHAPTER 2
Analysis on Sensitivity & Robustness

2.1 Introduction

2.2 PID, Robust & Optimal Controllers

2.3 System Sensitivity

2.4 Analysis of Robustness Dr. Yahaya

2.5 System with Uncertain Parameters

11
2.1 Introduction
■ Open-Loop Systems
Disturbance

Reference Input Output

Controller Actuator Plant

12
2.1 Introduction
■ Closed-Loop Systems
Disturbance

Reference Input Output

+
Controller Actuator Plant
-

Sensor

CL systems are much ‘superior’ than the OL systems.

13
 PID (P, P+I, P+D,
P+I+D), Lead-
Lag
2.1 Introduction compensator,
State Feedback,
etc…
■ How we design a CL system? Disturbance

Reference Input Output

+
Controller Actuator Plant
-

Sensor
4. Implementation 1. Modelling

Mathematical
Controller
model

2. Analysis
3. Design

14
2.1 Introduction
■ The control systems designed using the methods & concepts
discussed in the previous Control Engineering courses assume the
precise knowledge of the model of the plant & its parameters.
■ However the plant models are always inaccurate representation of
the actual physical systems due to:
– Parameter changes
– Un-modeled dynamics
– Un-modeled time delay
– Change in equilibrium point (operating point) More advanced
– Sensor noise approach
– Unpredicted disturbance input is needed!

15
2.2 PID, Robust & Optimal Controllers
PID Control de(t )
u (t )  K P e(t )  K I  e(t )dt  K D
dt
Disturbance

Reference e(t) Input Output

+
PID Actuator Plant
-

Sensor

16
PID Control
■ Widely used in industrial process control.
■ A.k.a. a three-term controller.
de(t )
u (t )  K P e(t )  K I  e(t )dt  K D
dt

■ PID takes into account not only the amount of deviation

from set-point but includes rates of the deviation and
duration of deviation.

17
PID Control
■ These three controller actions combine so that the process
variable is controlled and maintained at set-point without
deviation and a minimum of over/under shoot.
■ Can improve stability, speed of response, and steady-state
error.
■ Well-established in terms of proven performance and
simplicity.
■ To implement a PID controller, 3 parameters need to be
determined for the given process: proportional gain (KP),
integral gain (KI), and derivative gain (KD)  tuning
problem.

18
Optimal Control
■ An approach utilizing the State-Space model.
■ Optimal Control base or adjust controller action upon
one or more limiting factors.

Min thrust

Controller design to
minimize the fuel
consumption.
Max thrust

19
Robust Control
■ Most control system designs are based on a model of
the plant (the model is however an approximation of true
system dynamics).
■ The difference between the model and the actual
physical dynamics is known as model uncertainties.
■ If the design performs well for substantial variations from
the design values, the design is said to be robust.

20
Robust Control
■ The goal of robust systems design is to retain assurance
of system performance in spite of model inaccuracies
and changes.
■ A system is robust when the system has acceptable
changes in performance due to model changes or
inaccuracies.

A robust control system exhibits the desired performance

despite the presence of significant plant (process) uncertainty.

21
Robust Control
■ A control system is robust when:
1. It has low sensitivities
2. It is stable over the range of parameter variations
3. The performance continues to meet the specifications in the
presence of a set of changes in the system parameters

22
■ When should the robust control be attempted?

High
Machine intelligence needed

Adaptive
system
Robust
Moderate system

Feedback
system
Low OL system
Low Moderate High

Uncertainty of parameters and disturbances

23
 How to design a Robust Controller?

Root
Locus

Control Design Matlab Robust

Design Tools /Simulink
Problem Specs System

Bode
Plot

24
Basic Feedback Control: Systems with pre-filter
■ Why we need a pre-filter?
PI
Pre-filter Compensator Plant
+
R(s) Gp(s) Gc(s) G(s) = 1/s Y(s)
-

■ Design specs: Design a PI compensator such that

1. Settling time (with a 2% criterion) of 0.5 second
2. Overshoot of approximately 4%.

25
 PI Compensator
Suppose: 1 K
G(s)  ; Gc ( s )  K P  I
s s
KPs  KI

s
The CLTF is
Y ( s) Gc G ( s )G p ( s ) ( K P s  K I )G p ( s )
T (s)    2 1
R(s) 1  GcG ( s ) s  KPs  KI

Percent overshoot:   
 

 1
2  1
PO  100e 
 4%   
2

26
 4 4
Settling time: t s   0.5 s  n   8 2 rad/s
 n 0.5( 2 )
1

The standard 2nd characteristic equation:

s 2  2 n s  n2  0
From equation (1):
s2  KPs  KI  0
Then:
K I  n2  (8 2 ) 2  128
K P  2 n  2( 12 )(8 2 )  16

27
Case 1: No pre-filter is employed i.e. G p ( s )  1
The CLTF is
Y ( s ) ( K P s  K I ) 1 Additional
T (s)   2 zero!
R( s) s  K P s  K I
16s  128 16( s  8)
 2  2
s  16 s  128 s  16 s  128

Then:
a 8 1
 1 ;    0.707
 n 8 2

28
 Dorf,
pp. 253
Effects of a 3rd Pole and a Zero on 2nd Order System Response

The overshoot to a
step input is 21%

 21%

29
 8
Case 2: Pre-filter is employed G p ( s ) 
s 8
The CLTF is
No more
Y (s) 16( s  8) 8 zero!
T (s)   2 
R( s) s  16s  128 s  8
128
 2
s  16s  128
    0.7 
   
 2   2 
 1  1 ( 0.7 )
Then: PO  100e 
 100e 
 4.5%

In general, a pre-filter will be employed for systems with PI

compensators since the effect of the zero is significant.

30
2.3 System Sensitivity: Definition
■ Defined as the ratio of % change in the system TF to % change of the
process TF
Y (s)
■ Consider the system TF T ( s ) 
R( s)
T ( s ) / T ( s )
■ The sensitivity is defined as S
G ( s ) / G ( s )
T / T T G
■ For small incremental change S   
G / G G T

System sensitivity is the ratio of the change in the system TF

to the change of a process TF (or parameter)
for a small incremental change.

31
System Sensitivity: CL vs OL
■ Consider R(s) E(s) C(s)
G(s)
+-
H(s)
vdu  udv
■ The system TF is T (s) 
Y (s)

G(s) d uv  
R( s ) 1  GH ( s) v2
T G 1 G 1
■ The sensitivity is defined as S 
T
G   
G T 1  G ( s ) H ( s) G /(1  GH ) 1  G ( s ) H ( s )

The system sensitivity (CL) may be reduced below that of the OL system by
increasing GH(s) over the frequency range of interest.

32
System Sensitivity: Effect of H(s)
■ The sensitivity of the feedback system to changes in the feedback
element H(s) is
v  du  u  dv
d 
2
T H  G  H  GH u
S HT       v
H T  1  GH  G /(1  GH ) 1  GH v2

when GH  1 then S HT  1

Therefore, it is important to use feedback components

that will not vary with environmental changes or that can
be maintained constant.

33
System Sensitivity: Other useful formulas
■ The system sensitivity to , where  is a parameter within the
transfer function of a block G is
T T G
S S S
 G 

■ If the system TF T(s) is in the fraction form,

N ( s,  )
T ( s,  ) 
D ( s,  )
then
 ln T  ln T  ln D
ST     SN  SD
 ln   ln  0  ln   0
where 0 is the nominal value of the parameter.

34
 Dorf,
pp. 196

Example: Feedback amplifier

+ +
Gain
vin vo
-Ka
- -

■ The output voltage is vo   K a vin

vo
■ The TF is T  Ka
vin
■ The system sensitivity to changes in the amplifier gain is
T K a Ka
S KT a    (1)  1
K a T ( K a )

35
Example: Feedback amplifier (cont.)
■ Suppose a potentiometer Rp is used as a feedback
vo
vin
R1
Gain
-Ka Rp
R2

■ The TF is T   K a
1 Ka

where
R2
 and R p  R1  R2
Rp

36
Example: Feedback amplifier (cont.)
■ The block diagram is
+
vin -Ka vo
+

■ The CL system sensitivity to changes in the amplifier gain is

T K a  1  Ka 1
S T
      
K a T  (1  K a  ) 2   K a /(1  K a  ) 1  K a 
Ka

37
Example: Feedback amplifier (cont.)
T K a  1  Ka 1
S KT a       
K a T  (1  K a  ) 2   K a /(1  K a  ) 1  K a 

If K a  1  S KT a  1
■ Suppose K a  10 4 and   0.1
1 1 1
S KT a   
1  K a  1  (104 )(0.1) 1001

The sensitivity of CL system is one-thousandth of the OL amplifier.

38
 Dorf,
pp. 201

Example: Speed control system

■ Consider a speed control employing an armature-controlled dc motor:
ia Ra T

Input, ea Output,
J, B
ea(t) (t)
Tm 

■ Typical application: Steel mills for rolling the steel sheet

Steel bar

39
■ Block diagram of OL speed control system (without external
feedback):
Tw(s)

Ia(s) Tm(s)
+ 1 - 1
Ea(s) KT (s)
- Ra + Js  B

Kb

40
 OLTF:  ( s) KK K
G ( s)   
r ( s)  Ra  s  1
KT

1  Kb  
 Js  B 
 

where KT JRa
K ; 
BRa  K b K T BRa  K b KT
The sensitivity of the OL mode of operation to variation in the constant K is
G K  1  K
S KG      1
K G  s  1   K 
 
 s  1 

41
 ■ Block diagram of CL speed control system:
Tw(s)
Ea(s) Ia(s) Tm(s)
+ 1 - 1
r(s) KA + KT (s)
- Ra + Js  B
-

Kb

Kt

42
 CLTF:  ( s)  K AG ( s )  KK A K t
T ( s)  
 Kt   
 
r ( s )  1  K A K t G ( s)  s  1  KK A K t
The sensitivity of the CL system to variation in the constant K is

T T K s  1
S 
K  
K T s  1  KK A K t
The sensitivity of the CL system to variation in the constant K is
T K s  1
S KT   
K T s  1  KK A K t

43
 1 1  KK A K t
Suppose for a typical application, we have:  0.1 ;  10
 
Then s  0.1
S KT 
s  10
■ Sensitivity is a function of s and must be evaluated for various values
of frequency.
T
■ At specific frequency, say, s = j = j1, we have S K  0.1

Thus, compared to the OL case, the sensitivity of the CL

speed control system at  = 1 is reduced by a factor of ten!

In order to reduce sensitivity of the CL system to parameter

variations, the amplifier gain KA must be >> 1.

44
Example: Depth control system
■ Consider a depth control system of a submersible vehicle:
Disturbance
D(s)

+ + - 1
R(s) K K1 Y(s)
Desired - - + s Actual
depth depth
K2
Sensor
K

45
a) Determine the CLTF T(s) = Y(s)/R(s).
b) Determine the sensitivity S KT and S KT
1
c) Determine the steady-state error due to a disturbance D(s) = 1/s.
d) Compute the response y(t) for a step input R(s) = 1/s when K = K2 = 1 and 1 <
K1 < 10. Select K1 for the fastest response.

Solution: X(s) Disturbance

D(s) = 0
a) Let D(s) = 0.
E(s)
+ + - 1
R(s) K K1 Y(s)
Desired - - + s Actual
depth depth
K2
Sensor
K

46
Then K
Y ( s) 1
K1
 s
K1 K 2

E ( s) 1  s 1  K1 K 2
K
Y ( s) 1
K1
 s
K1 K 2

X (s) 1  s s  K1 ( K  K 2 )
The CLTF is
Y ( s) KK1
T (s)  
R ( s ) s  K1 ( K  K 2 )

47
b) Y ( s) KK1
T (s)  
R ( s ) s  K1 ( K  K 2 )
T [ s  K1 ( K  K 2 )]K  KK1 ( K  K 2 ) sK
 
K1 [ s  K1 ( K  K 2 )]2 [ s  K1 ( K  K 2 )]2

The system TF sensitivity to gain K1 is

T K1 sK K1
S KT 1    
K1 T [ s  K1 ( K  K 2 )]2  KK1 
 
 s  K1 ( K  K 2 ) 
s

s  K1 ( K  K 2 )

48
 Y (s) KK1
T ( s)  
R ( s ) s  K1 ( K  K 2 )
T [ s  K 1 K 2 ] K1

K [ s  K1 ( K  K 2 )]2
The system TF sensitivity to gain K is

T K ( s  K1 K 2 ) K1 K
S KT    
K T [ s  K1 ( K  K 2 )]2  KK1 
 
 s  K1 ( K  K 2 ) 
s  K1 K 2

s  K1 ( K  K 2 )

49
c) Let R(s) = 0.
X(s) Disturbance
D(s) = 1/s
E(s)
+ + - 1
R(s) = 0 K K1 Y(s)
Desired - - + s Actual
depth depth
K2
Sensor
K

50
 - 1
D(s) Y(s)
Disturbance + s Actual
depth
K1

-
K2
-

Then  1s
Y (s) 1
 
D ( s ) 1  ( s )[ K1 ( K  K 2 )] s  K1 ( K  K 2 )
1

51
E ( s)  R( s )  Y ( s )  Y ( s ) (R ( s )  0)
1
  D( s)
s  K1 ( K  K 2 )

The steady-state error is

s 1 1
ess  lim sE ( s )  lim   
s 0 s  K ( K  K )
s 0
1 2  s  K1 ( K  K 2 )

52
d) Y ( s) K1
K  K 2  1  T (s)  
R ( s ) s  2 K1
 K1  1  12 1
Y ( s )       2

 s  2 K1  s  s s  2 K1
The system response is
y (t )  12 (1  e 2 K1t )u (t ) ; u (t ) is a unit  step
Select K1 = 10 for the fastest response.

53
2.3.1 Parameter Design by RL Method
■ Originally, the RL method was developed to determine the locus of
roots of the characteristic equation as the system gain K is varied
from 0 to infinity.
1  F ( s)  0
■ Can be extended to investigate the effect of two parameters, say, 
and .
■ This method is known as the parameter design method.
■ How? Consider a 3rd order system:
s 3  (3   ) s 2  3s  6  0
s 3  3s 2  s 2  3s  6  0

54
■ Isolate  and rewrite the equation in RL form:
s 3  3s 2  s 2  3s  6  0
s 2
1 3 2
0
s  3s  3s  6
■ To determine the effect of two parameters ( and ), the RL approach must be repeated twice.

■ Consider a 3rd order system, say:

s 3  s 2  s    0
s
1 3 2 0 ()
s  s 

55
■ Note that the denominator of the previous equation is the
characteristic equation of the system with  = 0.
■ Therefore, we must first evaluate the effect of varying  from zero to
infinity by utilizing the equation
s3  s 2    0
 
1 3 2  0 1 2  0 with   0
s s s ( s  1)
■ Now the effect of  can be studied, and the value can be used to
study the effect of  by using equation ():
s
1 3 2 0
s  s 

56
Two-step method:
1. Obtain a RL as  varies and select a suitable value for
 (satisfactory root locations).
2. Obtain another RL for  by noting that the poles of
equation () are the roots found in Step 1.

57
 Dorf,
pp. 380

Example: Welding head control system

■ Consider a welding head control system:
+ E(s) + K1
R(s) G (s)  Y(s)
s ( s  2)
- -

H1 ( s )  K 2 s

■ A feedback system is to be designed to satisfy the following specs:

1. The steady-state error for a ramp input is  35% of the input slope.
2. The damping ratio of dominant roots  0.707.
3. The settling to within 2% of final value is  3 s.

Design issue: What are the values of K1 and K2 to achieve the above
specs?

58
 G(s)
G2 ( s ) 
1  GH1 ( s )

Solution:
+ E(s) + K1
R(s) G(s)  Y(s)
- - s ( s  2)

H1 ( s )  K 2 s

Y ( s) K1 K1
G2 ( s)   
E ( s) s ( s  2)  K1 K 2 s s ( s  2  K1 K 2 )
CLTF:
Y (s) G2 ( s ) K1
T (s)   
R ( s ) 1  G2 ( s ) s ( s  2  K1 K 2 )  K1

59
The error: E ( s)  R( s)  Y ( s )
 K1 
 R( s ) 1  
 s ( s  2  K 1 K 2 )  K1 
 s ( s  2  K1 K 2 ) 
 R( s)  
 s ( s  2  K1 K 2 )  K1 

For a ramp input, R(s)=|R|/s2:

 s ( s  2  K1 K 2 )  R
E (s)    2
 s ( s  2  K K
1 2 )  K1 s

The steady-state error due to a ramp input is:

 ( s  2  K1 K 2 )  2  K1 K 2
ess (t )  lim sE ( s)  lim    R  R
s 0 s 0 s ( s  2  K K )  K K1
 1 2 1

60
■ From the 1st design requirement,
ess (t ) 2  K1 K 2
  0.35  = 0.707
R K1

■ From the 2nd design requirement,   0.707

 roots of the CL system be located
below the line at 45 in the LHP of s-plane. -2 -1 0

■ From the 3rd design requirement,

4
Ts   3 s    1.33 Ts line


61
Parameters to be selected:   K1 ;   K1 K 2

Characteristic equation: 1  GH ( s )  s 2  2 s  K K s  K
1 2 1

 s 2  2s  s    0
Two-step approach:
1. Obtain RL of  (with  = 0): s 2  2 s    0


1 2
0
s  2s

1 0
s ( s  2)

62
 System: sys
Gain: 20.3
Pole: -1 + 4.4i
RL of 'alpha' Damping: 0.222
6 Overshoot (%): 48.9
Frequency (rad/sec): 4.51

2
Imaginary Axis

-2

-4

System: sys
-6 Gain: 20.3
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 Pole: -1 --0.5
4.4i 0 0.5
Real Axis Damping: 0.222
Overshoot (%): 48.9
Frequency (rad/sec): 4.51

63
Two-step approach:
2. Obtain RL of  (with  = K1 = 20):

1  GH ( s )  s 2  2 s  s  

 s 2  2 s  s  20
s
 1 2
0
s  2 s  20

 2  4  80
s
2
 1  j 4.36

64
  = 0.707

RL as a function of 'beta'
6

2
 = 4.3
Imaginary Axis

0
-3.15
-2

-4

-6
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0
Real Axis

65
From the RL (as  is varied with  = K1 = 20):

  4.3  K1 K 2  20 K 2   K 2  0.215

The real part of these roots is  = 3.15. Then

4 4
  3.15  Ts    1.27 s  3 s
 3.15

The settling time of 1.27 seconds to reach the 2% of

the final value is considerably less than the
specification of 3 seconds.

66
MATLAB/SIMULINK simulation: 20

s2 +6.3s+20
Step Scope
Transfer Fcn
Step response of welding head control
1.4

1.2
X: 1.33
Y: 1.02

0.8
y(t)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time (s)

Ts = 1.3 s

67
2.4 Analysis of Robustness
■ Consider D(s)
Disturbance

Pre-filter Controller Plant

+ + +
R(s) Gp(s) Gc(s) G(s) Y(s)
-
Sensor
+ + N(s)
1
Noise
■ Goals:
– Maintaining a small tracking error (e = r - y) for an input r
– Keeping the output y(t) small for a disturbance d(t)
– Sensor noise n(t) much smaller than r(t) i.e. |r|>>|n|

68
■ The sensitivity function is

S ( s )  1  Gc ( s )G ( s ) 1

■ The CLTF, a.k.a. the complementary sensitivity function is

Gc ( s )G ( s )
T ( s) 
1  Gc ( s )G ( s )
■ When Gp(s) = 1, we have
S ( s)  T ( s)  1

69
Time Domain Performance

70
Frequency Domain Performance

71
2.5 System with Uncertain Parameters
■ Some systems have several parameters that are constants but
uncertain within a range.
■ For example, consider a system with a characteristic equation
n n 1 n2
s  an 1s  an  2 s    a0  0
with known coefficients within bounds
 i  ai   i and i  0, , n

■ To ascertain the system stability, all possible combinations of

parameters must be investigated.

72
2.5 System with Uncertain Parameters
■ Fortunately, it is possible to investigate a limited number of worst-
case polynomials.
■ The analysis of only 4 parameters is sufficient, and they are readily
defined for a third-order system with a characteristic equation
s 3  a2 s 2  a1s  a0  0
■ Then the 4 polynomials are
q1 ( s )  s 3   2 s 2  1s   0 One of the 4 polynomials represents
3 2
q2 ( s )  s   2 s  1 s   0 the worst case and may indicate
either unstable performance or at
q3 ( s )  s 3   2 s 2  1s   0 least the worst performance for the
q4 ( s )  s 3   2 s 2  1 s   0 system in that case.

73
 Dorf,
pp. 731

Example: 3rd order system with uncertain coefficients

■ Consider a 3rd order system with uncertain coefficients such that
8  a0  60   0  8,  0  60;
12  a1  100  1  12, 1  100;
7  a2  25   2  7,  2  25.
■ Then the 4 polynomials are
q1 ( s )  s 3  7 s 2  100s  60,
q2 ( s )  s 3  25s 2  12s  8,
q3 ( s )  s 3  25s 2  100s  8,
q4 ( s )  s 3  7 s 2  12s  60.

74
■ Check the 4 polynomials by means of Routh-Hurwitz criterion:
1) q1 ( s )  s 3  7 s 2  100 s  60  0 2) q1 ( s )  s 3  25s 2  12s  8  0
s3 1 100 s3 1 12
s2 7 60 s2 25 8
s1 640
7 STABLE
s1 300
8
STABLE
s 0
60 s0 8
3) q3 ( s )  s 3  25s 2  100s  8  0 4) q1 ( s )  s 3  7 s 2  12 s  60  0
s3 1 100 s3 1 12
s2 25 8 s2 7 60
s1 100
8 s1 84
60
STABLE STABLE
s0 8 s0 60
The system is STABLE for all the range of uncertain parameters.

75
 Dorf,
pp. 732

Example: Stability of uncertain system

+
■ Consider R(s) G(s) Y(s)
+

■ Suppose the plant TF (under nominal conditions) is

4.5
G (s) 
s ( s  1)( s  2)

■ The nominal characteristic equation is

4.5
q ( s )  1  GH  1   s 3  3s 2  2 s  4.5  0
s ( s  1)( s  2)

76
 Root Locus for Nominal TF
2

1.5

0.5
Imaginary Axis

System: sys0
-0.5 Gain: 1.33
Pole: 0.00129 - 1.41i
Damping: -0.000914
-1 Overshoot (%): 100
Frequency (rad/sec): 1.41

-1.5

-2
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Real Axis

77
■ Check the system stability under nominal condition (using R-H):
q ( s )  s 3  3s 2  2 s  4.5  0
s3 1 2
s2 3 4 .5 The system is
nominally STABLE
s1 6
4.5

s0 4 .5
■ Suppose the system has uncertain coefficients such that
4  a0  5   0  4,  0  5;
1  a1  3  1  1, 1  3; and
2  a2  4   2  2,  2  4.

78
■ Then we must examine the 4 polynomials:
q1 ( s )  s 3  2s 2  3s  5,
q2 ( s )  s 3  4 s 2  s  4,
q3 ( s )  s 3  4 s 2  3s  4,
q 4 ( s )  s 3  2 s 2  s  5.
1) q1 ( s)  s 3  2 s 2  3s  5  0 2) q1 ( s )  s 3  4s 2  s  4  0
s3 1 3 s3 1 1
s2 2 5 s2 4 4
s1 1
2 s1 0 MARGINALLY
STABLE
s 0
5 STABLE
s0 4

79
 3) q3 ( s )  s 3  4 s 2  3s  4  0 4) q 4 ( s )  s 3  2 s 2  s  5  0
s3 1 3 s3 1 1
s2 4 4 s2 2 5
s1 3 s1  32
STABLE UNSTABLE
s0 4 s0 5
■ Therefore the system is UNSTABLE for the worst case, where 2 =
minimum, 1 = minimum, and 0 = maximum. This occur when the
plant has changed to
q( s)  1  GH  s 3  2s 2  s  5  s ( s  1)( s  1)  5
5
 1 0
s ( s  1)( s  1)
5
 G ( s) 
s ( s  1)( s  1)

80
■ Note that the 3rd pole has moved towards the j-axis to its limit at
s = -1 and that the gain has increased to its limit at K = 5.
■ Root-Locus plot:

81
 Root Locus for Worst Case TF
2

1.5

0.5
Imaginary Axis

System: sys
0
Gain: 0.4
Pole: 0.00033 - 1i
-0.5 Damping: -0.00033
Overshoot (%): 100
Frequency (rad/sec): 1
-1

-1.5

-2
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Real Axis

82
 RL for Nominal & Worst Case TF'sSystem: sys
2
Gain: 0.403
Pole: 0.00189 + 1i
1.5 Damping: -0.00188
Overshoot (%): 101
Frequency (rad/sec): 1
1

0.5
Imaginary Axis

System: sys0
-0.5 Gain: 1.33
Pole: 0.000264 - 1.41i
Damping: -0.000187
-1 Overshoot (%): 100
Frequency (rad/sec): 1.41

-1.5

-2
-3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Real Axis

83
2.6 Summary
■ Robust control is needed to deal with the system parameters that are
constants but uncertain within a range.
■ One way of studying the system robustness is through the study of
system sensitivity.
■ Worst case

84
Slide For Contents

85