Nonlinear Systems

Nonlinear Systems
Tutorials
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Kai Michels

Dipl.-Ing. Simon Rünzi
and others
February 3, 2016
Universität Bremen
Contents
Contents
1 Switching Elements 5
1.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2 Equilibrium Points 14
2.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3 Lyapunov 18
3.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4 Describing Function 23
4.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.5 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5 Circle Criterion 39
5.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6 Hyperstability 46
6.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7 Sliding-Mode Control 53
7.1 Sliding-mode control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
8 Gain Scheduling Controller 59

8.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
9 Exam 1 - Autumn 2010 64

9.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
9.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
9.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
10 Exam 2 - Spring 2011 69

10.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
2
Contents
10.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
10.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
10.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
11 Exam 3 - Autumn 2011 74

11.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
11.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
12 Exam 4 - Spring 2012 78

12.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
12.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
12.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
12.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
12.5 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
13 Exam 5 - Autumn 2012 88

13.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
13.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
13.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
13.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
13.5 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
14 Exam 6 - Spring 2013 102

14.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
14.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
14.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
14.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
15 Exam 7 - Autumn 2013 112

15.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
15.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
15.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
15.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
16 Exam 8 - Spring 2014 114

16.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
16.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
16.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
16.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3
Contents
17 Exam 9 - Autumn 2014 117

17.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
17.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
17.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
17.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
18 Exam 10 - Spring 2015 119

18.1 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
18.2 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
18.3 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
18.4 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
18.5 Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4
1 Switching Elements
1.1 Task
u e y
y0
ç
y1 V −ç ç 0
Ts+1
Figure 1: Switching Element with hysteresis and a PT1 in the feedback loop
For the system shown in figure 1, y will perform square-wave oscillations as

a result to a step input. Determine the average value of y as function of the
input value u and the parameters V , T and ε.
Solution
y
u0 + e
u0
y1
u0 - e
0 t1 t2
t
Figure 2: Behavior of y and y1
5
Assumption: Steady state condition ⇒ y1 begins at t0 on a switching thresh-

old
t

y = u0 − ε + [Vy0 − (u0 − ε)] 1 − e− T (1)
There is a switchover point at t1 :
y1 (t1 ) = u0 + ε (2)
t1

= u0 − ε + [Vy0 − (u0 − ε)] 1 − e T (3)

Vy0 − u0 + ε
⇒ t1 = T · ln (4)
Vy0 − u0 − ε
with y = 0 holds, Uo
t−t1
y1 = (ω0 + ε) e− T (5)
Toggle at t2 :
t2 −t1
y1 (t2 ) = u0 − ε = (u0 + ε) e− T (6)
u0 + ε
t2 − t1 = T · ln (7)
u0 − ε
Mean value for y:
t1 t0
ȳ = y0 · = y0 · (8)
t2 T

V −u +ε
T · ln Vyy0 −u00 −ε
0
=
V −u +ε
(9)
u0 +ε
T · ln u0 −ε + T · ln Vyy0 −u00 −ε
0

Vy0 −u0 +ε
ln Vy −u0 −ε
0
= (10)
u0 +ε Vy0 −u0 +ε
ln u0 −ε Vy −u0 −ε
0
6
1.2 Task
controller
w e u 1 u V y
TIs (T1s+1)(T2s+1)
yR
GR(s)
Figure 3: IT2 -plant with 2-point controller
A system with an integrator at its input and a second-order lag element

(D > 1, T2 > T1 ) shall be controlled with a 2-point switching element with
the feedback transfer function GR (s).
Determine the transfer function GR (s) and its parameters, so that the dynamic
behavior of the controlled system shows approximately the same behavior as a
PI-controlled system would show.
Solution
The symbol ¯ represents the mean value of a variable.

Assumptions:
GR (s = 0) = 1 GR is steady-state accurate. (11)

ȳR = GR (s) · ū ≈ e for small hysteresis (12)
The mean value of yR will follow the mean value of u. ū depends on the on-
and off-time of the switching element. But if ȳR = GR ū, the mean value ū will
be approximately equal to the control error e.
Then
1
ū = ·e (13)
GR (s)
1
GR (s) can be considered as controller transfer function.
7
Because of the integrator at the input of the plant, it is possible to include this
0
integrator in the controller. The output of the integrator is named u which
should be the new actuating variable.
0 1
u = ·u (14)
TI · s

1 1 ! 1
= · · e = VR + ·e (15)
TI · s GR (s) TI · s
| {z }
PI-controller
1 1 ! VR TI · s + 1
⇒ ·s· = (16)
TI GR (s) TI
·s
1 1
⇒ GR (s) = = (17)
VR TI · s + 1 TR · s + 1
GR (s) must be a first-order lag with the time constant TR = VR TI . The dom-
inant time constant of the plant, which is T2 here, should be compensated by
!
the zero of the PI-controller. Therefor TR = T2 .
T2
⇒ VR = (18)
TI
1
⇒ GR (s) = (19)
T2 · s + 1
8
1.3 Task
w e u a 1 v y=l
T1
w e u v y=l
T1
Figure 4: Switching element with PT1 and integrator
Prove the stability of the system shown in figure 4. First calculate the oscil-
lation, then derive the stability from the development of amplitude and time
period. Use only the first two quarter periods for calculation, starting with v
and l both at 0, going up. The first order lag element is set with gain V = 1
and with its time constant identical to the rise time t1 , i.e. the time when the
controller switches back (T1 = t1 ).
Solution
The steady oscillation needs to be calculated using the intervals [0, t1 ] and
[t1 , t2 ]. The relationship between the variables is defined as:
u = ±u0 (20)
a=u−v (21)
Z
v = a dt (22)
Z
l = v dt (23)
9
Interval [0, t1 ] The step response of the 1st order lag is calculated as:
− t

v (t) = u0 1 − e T1 (24)
From equations (23) and (24) l can be calculated for t = t1 .

t
−
l (t) = u0 t + T1 e T1 − 1 (25)
t

− T1
l (t1 ) = w = u0 t1 + T1 e 1 − T1 (26)
By inserting T1 = t1 the new l (t1 ) and v (t1 ) and therefore t1 can be calcu-
lated.
l (t1 ) = w = u0 t1 e−1 (27)

w
⇒ t1 = e (28)
u
0
1
v (t1 ) = u0 1 − (29)
e
Interval [t1 , t2 ]: For simplification, t1 is set as the new zero point. Remember
to be careful using the 1st order lag step response and start at v (t1 ) and go to
−u0 .
u0
æ 1ö
u0 ç 2 - ÷
æ 1ö è eø
ç1 - ÷
è eø
t
t1 t2¢
-u 0
Figure 5: Behavior of v
10
0
t = t − t1 (30)
" 0
!#
0 1 1 − tt
⇒ v t = u0 1 − − 2 − 1−e 1 (31)
e e
" 0
#
0 1 − tt
⇒ v t = u0 −1 + 2 − e 1 (32)
e
0
To calculate t2 , v is set to zero.
" 0 #
0 1 − tt2
0 = v t2 = u0 −1 + 2 − e 1 (33)
e
0
1 − tt2
1= 2− e 1 (34)
e
0
−t2
1
1 =e t1 (35)
2− e

0 1
⇒ t2 = t1 · ln 2 − (36)
e
0
For stability we want to compare t2 with t1 . Using:
1
e ≈ 2.72 ⇒ ≈ 0.37 (37)
e
1 1
2− < e ⇒ ln 2 − <1 (38)
e e
0
⇒ t2 < t1 (39)
The same could have been shown starting on the down-slope, i.e. for the next
two quarter-periods. So the time per quarter period decreases.
0
Next l needs to be calculated for t .
0 Z t0
00
l t = l (t1 ) + v dt (40)
0
Z t0 " 00
#
(32)
0
1 − tt 00
⇒ l t = l (t1 ) + u0 −1 + 2 − e 1 dt (41)
0 e
0
!!
0 1 − tt
= l (t1 ) + u0 −t − t1 2 − e 1 −1 (42)
e
11
0 0
Now l t2 can be calculated by inserting t2 . Remember that l (t1 ) = w.
0 !!
t
0 0 1 − t2
l t2 = w + u0 −t2 − t1 2 − e 1 −1 (43)
e

0 1 − ln(2− 1 )
= w − u0 t2 − u0 t1 2 − e e − 1 (44)
e

1
= w − u0 t1 ln 2 − + (45)
e
1 −1

1 1
− u0 t1 2 − 2− +u0 t1 2 − (46)
e e e
| {z }
1

1 1
= w + u0 t1 1 − − ln 2 − (47)
e e

(28)
0
w 1 1 1
⇒ l t2 = w + u
0 1 1 − − ln 2 − = l (t2 ) (48)
u
01+ e e e
Next we want to compare amplitudes of the two quarter periods. It is known

that:

1
1− <1 (49)
e

(38) 1 1
⇒ 1 − − ln 2 − <1 (50)
e e
1
<1 (51)
1 + 1e
Using equations (48), (50) and (51):
⇒ l (t2 ) < 2w (52)

⇒ l (t2 ) − l (t1 ) < l (t1 ) − l (0) (53)
(39)
⇒ t2 − t1 < t1 − 0 (54)
The amplitude and the quarter period time both decrease by time per quarter
period ⇒ stable.
12
1.4 Task
w e u=a v y=l
Figure 6: Switching element with two integrators
With a step for w as an input signal, derive a, v and l as functions of time by

calculating the first two time intervals.
13
2 Equilibrium Points
2.1 Task
G1(s) G2(s)
w e u y
Figure 7: Switching Controller with two PT1 -elements
V1 V2
G1 (s) = , G2 (s) = (55)
T1 · s + 1 T2 · s + 1
u
u0
−e0 e0 e
−u0
Figure 8: Switching Controller
a) Determine the equilibrium point(s) of the system for w = 2e0 .

b) Draw the system in a way, so that it forms a standard control loop with
a displacement from the equilibrium point(s) [∆w, ∆y, ∆u] = [0, 0, 0].
c) What is the transfer behavior of the new, resulting non-linear block?
d) Discuss the system behavior with u0 = 1, e0 = 1, V1 = V2 = 0.5.
1
e) Determine the equilibrium point(s) for G1 (s) = and w = 2e0 .
T1 s
14
Solution
a) The equilibrium point is the position of rest, when the input signal is
constant and after all transients have finished.
(
u0
· e for |e| < e0 (linear range)
u = f (e) = e0 (56)
±u0 for |e| ≥ e0 (non-linear range)
The possibility that we are either in the linear range or in the non-linear
range of the switching element has to be considered.
We are in the linear range when
|ur | < u0 ⇒ linear range (57)
Open loop transfer function:

u0 V1 V2
Go = · · (58)
e0 T1 s + 1 T2 s + 1
Closed loop transfer function T (s) from w to y:
u0 V1 V2
Go e0 · T1 s+1 · T2 s+1
T (s) = = (59)
1 + Go 1 + ue00 · T1Vs+1
1
· T2Vs+1
2
u0 V1 V2
⇒ yr = T (s = 0) · w = · 2e0 (60)
e0 + u0 V1 V2
Transfer function from w to u:
u0
e0
u= ·w (61)
1 + Go

u0
e0
⇒ ur = · w (62)

u0 V1 V2
1+ e0 · T1 s+1 · T2 s+1
s=0
w=2e0
u0
= · 2e0 (63)
e0 + u0 V1 V2
Position of rest (equilibrium point) of linear range:

2e0 u0 V1 V2 2e0 u0
[w, yr , ur ] = 2e0 , , (64)
e0 + u0 V1 V2 e0 + u0 V1 V2
15
|ur | ≥ u0 ⇒ non-linear range (65)
In the non-linear range, u is always equal to plus or minus u0 . The plant

output in steady-state will be

V1 V2
|yr | = · ur = ±u0 · V1 V2 (66)
(T1 s + 1)(T2 s + 1) s=0
Position of rest of non-linear range:
[w, yr , ur ] = [2e0 , ±u0 V1 V2 , ±u0 ] (67)
b) General form:
w−yr ur
0 Δe e u Δu Δy
f(e,ė) G(s)
f
non-linear part
Figure 9: General form of a standard control loop
2e0−yr ur
0 Δe e u Δu Δy
f
G1(s) G2(s)
Figure 10: Control loop
c)
f 0 (∆e) = f (∆e + 2e0 − yr ) − ur (68)
16
d) As a first step, it is necessary to check if the system is in the linear or

non-linear range. With u0 = 1, e0 = 1 and V1 = V2 = 0.5, w = 2.
Assumption: linear range
2e0 u0 V1 V2 2 · 14 2
yr = = 1 = (69)
e0 + u0 V1 V2 1+ 4 5
8
e = w − yr = > e0 (70)
5
e is greater than e0 . But in the linear range, it must be smaller. Obviously
the assumption was wrong and the system is in the non-linear range:
1
yr = , ur = 1 (71)
4
Position of rest:

1
[w, yr , ur ] = 2, , 1 (72)
4
ur = u0 = 1 ⇒ constant
With small deviations of ∆w or ∆y nothing happens.
e) A position of rest will be reached when the input of the integrator is 0.
!
⇒ ur = 0 (in linear range) (73)
⇒ w − yr = 0 ⇒ yr = w = 2e0 (74)
[w, yr , ur ] = [2e0 , 2e0 , 0] (75)
17
3 Lyapunov
3 Lyapunov
3.1 Task
For the non-linear system shown in figure 11,
u1
x1
G1(s)
G2(s)
u2
x2
Figure 11: Non-linear system with two PT1 -elements
V1/2
G1/2 = (76)
T1/2 s + 1
a) Determine the equilibrium points.

b) Examine stability of the equilibrium point 0 by use of the Second Theo-
rem of Ljapunov.
c) Examine stability of the other equilibrium point(s) by linearization.
Solution
a) State-space equations:
1 V1
ẋ1 = − · x1 + · x1 x2 (77)
T1 T1
1 V2
ẋ2 = − · x2 + · x1 x2 (78)
T2 T2
18
3 Lyapunov
An equilibrium point is a position of rest, which is a steady state. In

steady state, the derivatives of the states are zero. This is used to calcu-
late the equilibrium points of the system:

! 1 V1 1 V1
0 = − · x1 + · x1 x2 = − + · x2 x1 (79)
T1 T1 T1 T1

! 1 V2 1 V2
0 = − · x2 + · x1 x2 = − + · x1 x2 (80)
T2 T2 T2 T2

0
⇒ xr1 = (81)
0
1 V1 !
⇒ − + · x2 = 0 (82)
T1 T1
1 V2 !
⇒ − + · x1 = 0 (83)
T2 T2
"1#
V2
⇒ xr2 = 1
(84)
V1
b) A Lyapunov-function has to be found. The standard approach is
V̇ (x) = λ1 x21 + λ2 x22 (85)
V is positive definite (all eigenvalues > 0) and grows unlimited with

|x1 | , |x2 |. (That is the benefit of the quadratic approach.)
V̇ (x) = 2λ1 · x1 · ẋ1 + 2λ2 · x2 · ẋ2 (86)

1 V1
= 2λ1 x1 − · x1 + · x1 x2 + (87)
T1 T1

1 V2
+ 2λ2 · x2 − · x2 + · x1 x2 (88)
T2 T2
2λ1 2 2λ2 2
=− · x1 (1 − V1 x2 ) − · x2 (1 − V2 x1 ) (89)
T1 T2
19
3 Lyapunov
The Lyapunov-function must decrease, so

!
V̇ (x) < 0 (90)
⇒ 1 − V 1 · x2 > 0 (91)
1 − V 2 · x1 > 0 (92)
1
⇒ x2 < (93)
V1
1
x1 < (94)
V2
x2 1
V1
1
V2
x1
Figure 12: Range of decreasing Lyapunov-Function in state space
In this range V̇ < 0 holds. But this is not the domain of attraction,
because it has to be enclosed by a contour line of V (x).
Next, a contour line that encloses as much as possible of the range of
V̇ < 0 has to be determined:
c := V (x) = λ1 x21 + λ2 x22 ⇒ ellipse (95)
Now λ1 and λ2 are defined such that the resulting ellipse touches both
boundary lines for V̇ < 0. The points
"1# " #
V2
0
, 1
(96)
0 V2
shall be on the ellipse.
1
c = λ1 · ⇒ λ1 = V22 · c (97)
V22
1
c = λ2 · 2 ⇒ λ2 = V12 · c (98)
V1
20
3 Lyapunov
c can be chosen arbitrarily: c := 1
V = V22 · x21 + V12 · x22 (99)
x2 1
V1
1
domain of
V2
attraction
x1
Figure 13: Domain of Attraction in state space
c)
ẋ1 = f (x1 , x2 ) (100)

∂f ∂f
∆ẋ1 = · ∆x1 + · ∆x2 (101)
∂x1 xr2 ∂x2 xr2

1 V1 V1
= − + x2 · ∆x1 + x1 · ∆x2 (102)
T1 T1 xr2 T1 xr2

1 V1 1 V1 1
= − + · ∆x1 + · ∆x2 (103)
T1 T1 V1 T1 V2
V1 1
∆ẋ1 = · · ∆x2 (104)
V2 T1
Analog:
V2 1
∆ẋ2 = · · ∆x1 (105)
V1 T2
Therefore:
" V1 1
#
0

∆ẋ1 V2 T1 ∆x1
ẋ = = V 1 (106)
∆ẋ2 2
0 ∆x2
V1 T2
21
3 Lyapunov
Check for stability by calculating the eigenvalues.

λ − VV21 T11 1 !
det(λI − A) = V2 1 = λ2 − =0 (107)

− V1 T2 λ T1 T2
1
⇒ λ1,2 = ± √ (108)
T1 T2
There is one stable eigenvalue in the left half plane of the complex plane,
and one unstable eigenvalue with positive real part. ⇒ unstable!
The system is unstable in this equilibrium point, which is exactly on the
margin of the range in which the Lyapunov function decreases. But it is
outside the Domain of Attraction
22
4 Describing Function
4.1 Task
w e u 1 x
Ð
(s+1)4 b
−b
Figure 14: Switching Element with PT4
tan(α) = m (109)
a) Calculate the describing function.

b) Analyze the stability for different values of m.
Solution
a)
(
b+m·e for e > 0
u= (110)
−b + m · e for e < 0
e = A · sin(ωt) (111)
With

2π
sin(ωt) = sin ·t (112)
T
it follows, that

T
e > 0 for t = 0, and (113)
2

T
e < 0 for t = ,T . (114)
2
23
Now, the Fourier-coefficients of the fundamental wave can be calculated.

(See section 12.5 in the lecture notes for details):
u(t) = A1 · cos(ωt) + B1 · sin(ωt) (115)

= C1 · sin(ωt + ϕ1 ) (116)
e = A · sin(ωt) is a sine wave signal without phase-shift, so it is point

symmetric to 0. Because of that, there is no cosine-part and the Fourier-
coefficient A1 = 0.
2 T
Z
B1 = u(t) sin(ωt) dt (117)
T 0
Z T
2 2
= [b + mA sin(ωt)] sin(ωt) dt + (118)
T 0
Z T !
+ [−b + mA sin(ωt)] sin(ωt) dt (119)
T
2
T
Z !
2 2
= ·2 [b + mA sin(ωt)] sin(ωt) dt (120)
T 0
2π
with T =
ω
Z π Z π
2ω ω 2ω ω
B1 = b sin (ωt) dt + mA sin2 (ωt) dt (121)
π 0 π 0
π
2ω 1 ω
= · b · − · cos(ωt) + (122)
π ω 0
π
2ω 1 1 ω
+ · mA · ·t− · sin(2ωt) (123)
π 2 4ω 0

2ω 1 1
= ·b· + + mA (124)
π ω ω
4b
= + mA (125)
π
4b
q
C1 = A21 + B12 = B1 = + mA (126)
π
A1
ϕ1 = arctan =0 (127)
B1
24
C1 (A) jϕ1 (A) 4b

⇒ N (A) = ·e = +m (128)
A πA
The describing function represents the transfer function of the non-linear
element, but only with respect to the frequency ω of the fundamental
wave of e!
If the describing function of a two point switching element is already

known (from lecture), this task could be solved in an easier way:
u1
e u e N1(A) u
=
u2
N2(A)
Figure 15: Equivalent blocks and their describing functions
4b
N1 (A) = descr. fct. of 2-point sw. elem. (129)
πA
N2 (A) = m linear part (130)
4b
N (A) = N1 (A) + N2 (A) = +m (131)
πA
b) N (A) is purely real and
lim N (A) = ∞, (132)

A→0
lim N (A) = m. (133)
A→∞
1 1
That means, that − N (A) goes from 0 to − m . Now, the Nyquist-plot of
1
− N (A) and the system can be drawn:
25
jIm
−1 − 1 Re
m N(A)
G(jæ)
1
Figure 16: Nyquist plot of − N (A) and PT4
Nyquist-criterion for stability: The phase-shift ∆ϕ of the Nyquist plot

of the open loop transfer function must be equal to ∆ϕ = ik · π2 + rk · π
with respect to the critical point (ik : number of integrators, rk : number
of (unstable) poles in the right half-plane). Here, only the system has
! 1
to be considered, so ∆ϕ = 0, while the critical point is given by − N (A)
(depending on the amplitude A).
1
• All points of − N (A) right to the intersection:
∆ϕ = 2π ⇒ increasing amplitude (unstable)!
1
• All points of − N (A) left to the intersection:
∆ϕ = 0 ⇒ decreasing amplitude (stable)
The intersection exists, if

1
− > |intersect. of G(jω) with negative real axis| . (134)
m
Then, there will be a stable limit cycle.

The intersection of G(jω) with the negative real axis can be calculated:
1 1 (−jω + 1)4
G(jω) = = · (135)
(jω + 1)4 (jω + 1)4 (−jω + 1)4
ω 4 − 6ω 2 + 1 + j 4ω 3 − 4ω

= (136)
(ω 2 + 1)4
26
4ω 3 − 4ω !
Im {G(jω)} = 4 =0 (137)
(ω 2 + 1)
!
4ω 3 − 4ω = 0 (138)
⇒ ω1 = 0 or ω2 = 1 (139)
The Nyquist plot crosses/touches the imaginary axis at the frequencies

ω1 = 0 (starting point of Nyquist plot) and ω2 = 1. ω2 is the solution of
interest.
The point of intersection is:
ω24 − 6ω22 + 1 1−6+1 1

Re {G(jω2 )} = 4 = =− (140)
2
ω2 + 1 16 4
For m < 4:
1
− N (A) is partially located on the left side of the intersection with the
Nyquist plot of G. This case represents the stable limit cycle.
For m ≥ 4:
1
− N (A) is completely located on the right side of the Nyquist plot of G or
touches it for A → ∞ (infinite amplitude). The system is unstable!
4.2 Task
A non-linear transfer element with the following characteristic curve is given.

The amplitude A of the input waveform is always greater than a1 .
u
b2
b1
−a2 −a1
a1 a2 e
−b1
−b2
Figure 17: Switching Element
27
a) Sketch the time behavior of a sinusoidal input waveform with A > a2 ,

together with the corresponding output signal of the non-linear transfer
element into the same diagram.
b) Does the describing function depend on the frequency? (give a reason)
c) Without calculation, contemplate the behavior of the describing function
N (A). Sketch this behavior in a diagram as function of the amplitude A
of the input signal.
d) With the precondition of A a2 , determine the stability of the closed
loop system comprising the non-linear transfer element and a 2nd -order
lag (PT2 -term).
e) With the precondition of A a2 , determine the stability of the closed
loop system comprising the non-linear transfer element and a 3rd -order
lag (PT3 -term).
Solution
a) See figure 18.
A
b2
a2
b1
a1
x,y
- a1
-b1
- a2
-b2
-A
t
Figure 18: Time behavior of a sinusoidal input waveform (curve) and output
(green dashed curve) of non-linear transfer element
28
b) The describing function is not dependent on the frequency because the

non-linearity has no time behaviour. Therefore, only the amplitude has
an effect on the describing function.
c) The describing function is defined by the fourier-coefficient of the funda-
mental wave of the limit cycle:
C1 (A) jϕ1 (A)

N (A) = ·e (141)
A
It means, that the amplitude of the fundamental wave at the output
of the non-linear block increases (because of C1 (A)) depending on the
amplitude A of the input limit cycle oscillation and additionally decreases
with growing amplitudes (because of A∗ ).
N(A)
b2
a2
b1
a1
A
a1 a2
Figure 19: Describing Function N (A)
• For A < a1 ,
there will be no output of the non-linear block.
• For a1 < A < a2 ,
the output will be switching between b1 , 0 and −b1 while the du-
ration at every output level is depending on A. The describing
function will grow very fast when A reaches a1 . While A is increas-
ing more, the time at levels ±a1 increases as well, which leads to an
increasing fourier-coefficient C1 (A). But because of the division by
A the describing function will decrease until A reaches a2 .
• For a2 < A,
the behaviour of the describing function will be similar to the pre-
vious range of A, but for high amplitudes, the describing function
29
will go towards zero. The reason is, that the output level of the
non-linear transfer element is limited to ±b2 . When A increases
more and more, only the amount of time at the levels ±b2 increases,
which will effect the fourier-coefficient of the fundamental wave only
marginal.
d)
Im
Re
-b2
1
-
N(A)
PT2
PT3
1
Figure 20: PT2 , PT3 and − N (A)
In figure 20 it can be seen, that the curves do not intersect. Additionally,

1
from every point of − N (A) to G(jω), ∆ϕ = 0 and therefore the system
is stable.
e) It can be seen in figure 20 that there is an intersection when V is increased.
For the points left of the intersection, ∆ϕ = 0 and therefore the curve
decreases. For the points right of the intersection, ∆ϕ = −2π so that the
curve ascents.
⇒ The system is stable for small V .
4.3 Task
For the following non-linear element (figure 21), compute the describing func-
tion. From this, derive the describing function of an
30
a) ideal 3-point switching element.

b) ideal 2-point switching element.
c) 2-point switching element with hysteresis.
-a - qa
e
qa a
-b
Figure 21: Switching Element
d) For the last describing function, evaluate stability with the linear part
as:
• an IT1 -system.
• two integrators.
• a PT2 -system.
Solution
Figure 22 demonstrates the problem for A > a, |q| ≤ 1:
31
a
qa
u
-qa
-a
-b
0 p 2p 3p
w w w
t
Figure 22: Behavior of sine wave input (blue curve) and output (green dashed)
of the switching element
Calculation of the Fourier coefficients of the fundamental wave:

Z T
2 T
Z
4 2
B1 = u(t) · sin (ωt) dt = u(t) · sin (ωt) dt (142)
T 0 T 0
2π
with T = ω and u(t) = b in the interval [ta , tqa ]:
tqa
2ω tqa
Z
2ω 1
B1 = b · sin (ωt) dt = · b · − · cos(ωt) (143)
π ta π ω ta
With
a
A · sin (ωta ) = a ⇒ sin (ωta ) = (144)
A
qa
A · sin (ωtqa ) = qa ⇒ sin (ωtqa ) = (145)
A
(146)
q
cos(x) = ± 1 − sin2 (x) (147)
π
cos (ωta ) > 0 because 0 ≤ ωta ≤ (148)
2
π
cos (ωtqa ) < 0 because ≤ ωtqa ≤ π (149)
r 2
a 2
⇒ cos (ωta ) = + 1 − (150)
A
r qa 2
⇒ cos (ωtqa ) = − 1 − (151)
A
32
it follows for B1 :
r !
2ω 1 qa 2 1 r a 2
B1 = ·b· · 1− + · 1− (152)
π ω A ω A
r r !
2b qa 2 a 2
= · 1− + 1− (153)
π A A
Because of the hysteresis, the oscillation at the output will be delayed. The
Fourier coefficient A1 has to be calculated.
2 T
Z
A1 = u(t) · cos(ωt) dt (154)
T 0
de
e(t) = A · sin(ωt) , = ωA · cos(ωT ) (155)
dt
1
⇒ cos(ωT ) dt = dt (156)
ωA
Because of the hysteresis the switching points are different for ė < 0 and ė > 0.
There is an upper curve Fu for ė < 0 and a lower curve Fl for ė > 0.
Z A Z −A Z 0
1
⇒ A1 = · Fl de + Fu de + Fl de (157)
πA 0 A −A
Z A Z −A
1
= · Fl de + Fu de (158)
πA −A A
Z A Z A
1
= · Fl de − Fu de (159)
πA −A −A
Z A
1
=− · (Fu − Fl ) de (160)
πA
| −A {z }
area betw. switch. curves
1
=− · 2ab(1 − q) (161)
πA
Describing function:
1
N (A) = (B1 + jA1 ) (162)
A
1 A
q
2 2 j arctan B1
= A + B1 · e 1 (163)
A" 1 ! #
r qa 2 r
1 2b a 2 2ab
= 1− + 1− −j (1 − q) (164)
A π A A πA
33
Now the describing functions for different switching elements are computed:
a) Ideal 3-point switching element:
q=1
r
4b a 2 !
N (A) = · 1− , A>a (165)
πA A
b) Ideal 2-point switching element:

q = 1, a = 0
4b
N (A) = (166)
πA
c) 2-point switching element with hysteresis:

!
q = −1, A > a
r
4b a 2 4ab
N (A) = · 1− −j (167)
πA A πA2
r !
4b a a 2 a 2 a
= · 1− −j λ := (168)

πa A A A A
4b p
= · λ 1 − λ2 − jλ2 (169)
πa
d) Stability evaluation:
1 πa 1
− =− · √ (170)
N (A) 4b λ 1 − λ2 − jλ2
√
πa λ 1 − λ2 + jλ2
=− · (171)
4b λ2 (1 − λ2 ) + λ4
p
πa 1
=− · 1 − λ2 + j (172)
4b λ
r
πa A a 2 πa
=− · 1− −j (173)
4b a A 4b
s
πa A 2 πa
=− · −1−j (174)
4b a 4b
34
Im
I2
πa Re
A®¥ 4b
A=a
1
-
N(A) PT2
IT1
1
Figure 23: Nyquist plot of − N (A) , PT2 , IT1 and I2
• IT1 -system:
π π π
∆ϕnecessary = ik + rk π = + 0 = (175)
2 2 2
left of the intersection: ∆ϕ ≈ π2 ⇒ attenuating oscillation
right of the intersection: ∆ϕ ≈ −π ⇒ increasing oscillation
⇒ stable limit cycle
• Two integrators:
∆ϕnecessary = π (176)
π
∆ϕ ≈ −π . . . − 2 ⇒ unstable
• PT2 -system:
∆ϕnecessary = 0 (177)
left of the intersection: ∆ϕ ≈ 0 ⇒ attenuating oscillation

right of the intersection: ∆ϕ ≈ − 3π
2 ⇒ increasing oscillation
⇒ stable limit cycle
35
4.4 Task
A non-linear transfer element with the following characteristic curve is given:
-c
e
c
-k
Figure 24: Characteristic curve
a) Sketch the time course of the output value for a sinusoidal input oscilla-
tion with the amplitudes A < c and A > c.
b) Does the describing function depend on the frequency? (give a reason)
c) Without calculation, determine the behavior of the describing function
N (A). Sketch this behavior in a diagram as function of the input signal
amplitude A. Give the correct value for the maximum of the describing
function and for the bend point amplitude.
d) What precondition has to be fulfilled, so that the transfer function as a
controller in combination with a second-order lag gives a stable control
loop?
e) What precondition has to be fulfilled, so that the transfer function as
a controller in combination with a third-order lag gives a stable control
loop?
4.5 Task
In an earlier exercise the describing function of an ideal 5-point switching ele-

ment with the points ±(a1 ; b1 ) and ±(a2 ; b2 ) was determined. It showed that
it could be derived from the describing function of an ideal 3-point switching
element by adding another stage. Depending on the ratio between a1 and a2
the result looks like possibility a) or b).
36
N(A) N(A)
a) b)
a1 a2 A a1 a2 A
Figure 25: Describing function possibilites a) and b)
Here an ideal quantizer (no-delay, output unlimited) is of interest.
5
4
3
2
1
- 5 - 4 -3 -2 -1 e
1 2 3 4 5
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
Figure 26: Describing function of a quantizer
a) How would the describing function look in the case a) or b)?

b) Against which value does the describing function converge?
c) In case b) examine stability for the quantizer together with a PT3 -element
kv
of the form G(s) = (s+1) 3 with kv > 8.
d) Compare with the stability of a linear system with the quantizer replaced
by a gain factor of 1. Why was the result to be expected?
37
e) In case a) stability may change. Why, and what condition has to be

fulfilled for the amplitude at the intersection?
f) With the values given, case a) really applies. The following image shows
a section of the numerically calculated describing function. Determine a
kv for stability.
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Figure 27: Numerically calculated describing function
38
5 Circle Criterion
5 Circle Criterion
5.1 Task
For the plant shown in figure 28, calculate the real PID-controller.
KPID(s) F(u) G(s)

w e (1+Tr1s)(1+Tr2s) u 4
2 y 1 y
Vr 13
s(1+0.1s) (1+10s)2(1+s)
plant
Figure 28: Closed-loop non-linear system
a) Choose the controller time constants to reduce the system order.

b) Linearize the plant around zero and find the controller gain with the
Nyquist criterion.
c) Prepare the necessary steps for the circle criterion to include the non-
linearity. Try to find the controller gain graphically.
d) Compare! How would you choose the controller gain?
Solution
a) The time constants Tr1 and Tr2 of the controller zeros can be used to
cancel the double dominant time constant of the plant:
Tr1 = Tr2 = 10 (178)

Vr
G2 (s) = G(s) · K(s) = (IT2 ) (179)
s(1 + 0.1s)(1 + s)
b) The slope of the non-linear part of the plant around zero is

∂F (u)
= 2. (180)
∂u u=0
To be able to apply the Nyquist criterion it is necessary to draw the

Nyquist plot of 2 · G2 first.
39
5 Circle Criterion
jIm
−1 Re
2G2(jæ)
Figure 29: Nyquist plot
If Vr is small enough the intersection of the Nyquist plot with the real
axis lies right of −1. In that case the system is stable, because of
π
∆ϕ = = ∆ϕnecessary ⇒ stable (181)
2
To determine the maximum allowed controller gain Vr the frequency ω
at intersection of the Nyquist plot with the negative real axis must be
calculated first.
2 · Vr
2 · G2 (jω) = (182)
jω (1 + 0.1jω) · (1 + jω)
2 · Vr −jω (1 − 0.1jω) · (1 − jω)
= ·
jω (1 + 0.1jω) · (1 + jω) −jω (1 − 0.1jω) · (1 − jω)
(183)
2 · Vr −jω − 0.1ω 2 (1 − jω)

= (184)
ω 2 (1 + 0.01ω 2 ) · (1 + ω 2 )
2 · Vr −1.1ω 2 − j ω − 0.1ω 3

= (185)
ω 2 (1 + 0.01ω 2 ) · (1 + ω 2 )
2 · Vr −ω + 0.1ω 3

Im {2 · G2 (jω)} = 2 (186)
ω (1 + 0.01ω 2 ) · (1 + ω 2 )
2 · Vr (−1 + 0.1ω 2 ) !
= =0 (187)
ω (1 + 0.01ω 2 ) · (1 + ω 2 )
!
⇒ −1 + 0.1ω 2 = 0 (188)
2
ω = 10 (189)
√
⇒ ω= 10 (190)
40
5 Circle Criterion
Determine the controller gain:

√ o 2

n −2 · Vr · 1.1 ·
ω
Re 2 · G2 ω = 10 =
2 (1 + 0.01ω 2 ) · (1 + ω 2 ) √
(191)
ω
ω= 10
−2.2 · Vr
= (192)
(1 + 0.01 · 10) · (1 + 10)
−2.2 · Vr !
= > −1 (193)
12.1
⇒ Vr < 5.5 (194)
To safely ensure stability Vr should be chosen with some distance.

c) Find the limits of the sector that encloses the nonlinearity:
F(u) y k2=2 F(u) y

4
k1=1
k2t=0.5
2
1 3 u u
k1t=−0.5
Figure 30: F (u) and F 0 (u) with sector limits
1
km = (k1 + k2 ) = 1.5 (195)
2
41
5 Circle Criterion
F(u)
w e u y y y y
KPID F(u) G(s)
km
Figure 31: Block diagram
G2
z }| { 00
u = − KPID · G ·(y + km · u) (196)
00
⇒ u(1 + G2 · km ) = −G2 · y (197)
u G2
⇒ 00 = − = −Gt (198)
y 1 + G2 · k m
G2
⇒ Gt = (199)
1 + km G2
According to circle criterion different cases must be distinguished:
case G2 Gt Nyquist plot of G2 (lin. part)

k1 , k2 > 0 don’t care stable outside circle
k1 < 0 < k2 stable stable inside circle
k1 = 0, k2 > 0 stable stable right of − k12
k1 < 0, k2 = 0 stable stable left of − k11
here:
• k1 , k2 > 0 ⇒ G2 doesn’t have to be stable
• Gt must be stable
• linear part must be outside the circle
42
5 Circle Criterion
G2
Gt (s) = (200)
1 + km G2
Vr
= (201)
s(1 − 0.1s)(1 + s) + 1.5 · Vr
Vr
= 3 +1.1 s2 +1 s +1.5 · V
(202)
0.1 s
|{z} | {z } |{z} | {z }r
a3 a2 a1 a0
To check the stability of Gt (s), it is sufficient to check that all poles are
placed in the left side of the complex plane. Instead of calculating the
poles exactly, the Hurwitz criterion is applied:
All coefficients of the characteristic polynomial have the same sign. X
For n ≥ 3, the determinants of all north-western (sub)matrices of the
Hurwitz-matrix must have the same sign as well:
 
a2 a0 0
H = a3 a1 0  (203)
0 a2 a0
H1 = a2 = 1.1 >0 (⇒ all determinants must be > 0) (204)

a2 a0
H2 =
(205)
a3 a1
!
= a2 a1 − a3 a0 = 1.1 · 1 − 0.1 · 1.5 · Vr > 0 (206)
! 1.1
⇒ Vr < = 7.33 (207)
0.15
H3 = |H| (208)
!
= a0 · H2 = 1.5 · H2 > 0 X for Vr < 7.33 (209)
With Vr < 7.33 all poles are in left half plane; Gt (s) is stable.
(Remember the result from part b): For the linearized system, Vr must
be smaller than 5.5 to ensure stability. But here the stability of the
00
transfer function from y to u (only for the linear part) had to be proved
as precondition to apply the circle criterion.)
43
5 Circle Criterion
Calculation of the center and the radius of the circle:

1 1 1 1 1 1 3
m=− + =− + =− (210)
2 k1 k2 2 1 2 4

1 1 1 1 1 1
r= − = · = (211)
2 k1 k2 2 2 4
jIm
−1 −3 −1 Re
4 2
G2(jæ)
Figure 32: Circle criterion, sketch
Now it is possible to choose different controller gains Vr until the Nyquist

plot of G2 runs very close to the circle without touching it. The next
figure 33 shows some results.
Vr = 5.5, 2.5, 2.4

0.1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.7 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0
Figure 33: Circle criterion, simulation result
For Vr = 2.4, the Nyquist plot of the linear part (G2 ) nearly touches the
44
5 Circle Criterion
circle. According to the circle criterion, this is the maximum allowed gain
to ensure stability.
d) Compared to the linearization around 0 the non-linear gain is lowered.
However the allowed controller gain drops from 5.5 to 2.4. This is caused
by the conservative behavior of circle criterion. The gain of the controller
could be tuned again by hand, if material and safety permit possible
unstable reactions.
45
6 Hyperstability
6 Hyperstability
6.1 Task
There is the following linear SISO system:
ẋ1 = −x1 + 6x2 + u (212)

ẋ2 = −x1 − 2x2 + u (213)
y = 3x1 + 21x2 (214)
a) Calculate G(s).
b) Show that G(s) is hyperstable.
c) Combine this system with a nonlinear part f (e) = exp(e) − 1. Does the
resulting closed-loop system have a stable position of rest w = y = 0?
Solution
a) Calculate G(s): (Laplace transform)
ẋ1 = −x1 + 6x2 + u c s sx1 = −x1 + 6x2 + u (215)

6x2 + u
⇒ x1 = (216)
s+1
ẋ2 = −x1 − 2x2 + u c s sx2 = −x1 − 2x2 + u (217)
−x1 + u
⇒ x2 = (218)
s+2
insert (218) in (216):
−x1 + u
(s + 1)x1 = 6 +u (219)
s+2
(s + 1)(s + 2)x1 + 6x1 = 6u + (s + 2)u (220)
2
(s + 3s + 8)x1 = (s + 8)u (221)
s+8
x1 = 2 ·u (222)
s + 3s + 8
46
6 Hyperstability
and the other way round (216) in (218):

6x2 + u
(s + 2)x2 = − +u (223)
s+1
(s + 1)(s + 2)x2 + 6x2 = u(s + 1 − 1) (224)
2
(s + 3s + 8)x2 = s · u (225)
s
x2 = ·u (226)
s2 + 3s + 8
3s + 24 + 21s 24s + 24
y = 3x1 + 21x2 = 2
= 2 u (227)
s + 3s + 8 |s + {z
3s + 8}
G(s)
Alternatively it is possible to calculate the transfer function with the

following equation (known from Control Theory I):
G(s) = cT (sI − A)−1 b + d (228)
b) First the stability of G(s) has to be checked by calculating the poles:
s2 + 3s + 8 = 0 (229)
r r
3 9 3 23
s1/2 = − ± −8=− ±j (230)
2 4 2 4
Re{s1/2 } < 0 (both poles are in the left halfplane) ⇒ stable!
Now Re{G(jω)} > 0 ∀ ω has to be checked:
( )
(24jω + 24) 8 − ω 2 − 3jω

24jω + 24
Re = Re (231)
−ω 2 + 3jω + 8 (8 − ω 2 )2 + 9ω 2
72ω 2 + 192 − 24ω 2
= (232)
(8 − ω 2 )2 + 9ω 2
ω2 + 4
= 48 >0 (233)
(8 − ω 2 )2 + 9ω 2
(234)
⇒ strictly pos. real! ⇒ G(s) is hyperstable!
47
6 Hyperstability
c) It has to be shown that

Z T
uT · e dt ≥ −β02 (235)
0
Z T
⇒ (exp(e) − 1) · e dt ≥ −β02 (236)
0
if e > 0:
exp(e) > 1 ⇒ exp(e) − 1 > 0 ⇒ (exp(e) − 1) · e > 0
if e < 0:
exp(e) < 1 ⇒ exp(e) − 1 < 0 ⇒ (exp(e) − 1) · e > 0
For all control errors e the condition is satisfied. ⇒ The closed loop is
stable!
Only the linear part can be hyperstable. The whole system with non-
linearity is stable for a position of rest, if the equation above holds for
the non-linear part.
6.2 Task
There is the MIMO system

−2 1 1 0
ẋ = x+ u (237)
−1 −3 0 1

1 0
y= x (238)
0 1
a) Show that the system is hyperstable.

b) Swap the input variables: is the system still hyperstable?
c) Now the system is non-linear. Compute a feedback that stabilizes the
system.
Hint: take x22 to the non-linear part and use the results from a)
ẋ1 = −2x1 + x2 + x22 (239)

ẋ2 = −x1 − 3x2 + u (240)
y = x2 (241)
48
6 Hyperstability
Solution
a) Use theorem 12.9 (Kalman-Jakubovitch-Lemma):
If
• a linear state space system is controllable and observable
•
AT P + P A = −LLT (242)
LV = C T − P B (243)
T T
D+D =V V (244)
• P is positive definite and symmetric

• rank (L) = n (i. e. L is regular)
then the system is both strictly positive real and hyperstable.
Here:
• The system is controllable and observable (use Kalman).
•
D=0 ⇒ V =0 (245)
T T
A P + P A = −LL (246)
P B = CT (247)
Find a P and an L that fulfil these equations:

as B = C = I ⇒ P =I

T T −4 0
⇒ A + A = −LL = (248)
0 −6

T 4 0
⇒ LL = (249)
0 6

2 √0
one solution is: L = (250)
0 6
49
6 Hyperstability
• P is positive definite and symmetric and rank (L) = 2

There are matrices L, P , V that fulfil the equations of the Kalman-
Jakubovitch-Lemma.
⇒ The system is hyperstable!
b) Changing the input variables means:

0 1
B= (251)
1 0
from P B = C T = I,

−1 0 1
P =B = (252)
1 0
A positive definite matrix must have eigenvalues with positive real part.
eigenvalues of P :

λ −1 !
det = λ2 − 1 = 0 ⇒ λ1/2 = ±1 (253)
−1 λ
P is not positive definite. ⇒ The system is not hyperstable.

c) Redefine the system:
linear system
ẋ1 = −2x1 + x2 + u1 (254)

ẋ2 = −x1 − 3x2 + u2 (255)
y1 = x 1 (256)
y2 = x 2 = y (257)
non-linear system
u1 = x22 (258)
u2 = f (x1 , x2 ) = u (259)
| {z }
state controller
50
6 Hyperstability
Now, the linear system is the same as in a) ⇒ hyperstable

Additionally, it must be shown for the non-linear part, that the following
inequality holds:
Z T
uT y dt ≤ +β02 (260)
0
(u and y are used directly instead of u and e, therefore the original

inequality from the definition of hyperstability has to be used!)
Z T Z T
(u1 y1 + u2 y2 ) dt = (x22 x1 + f (x1 , x2 )x2 ) dt ≤ β02 (261)
0 0
Evaluate f (x1 , x2 ) so that:
x22 x1 + f (x1 , x2 )x2 ≤ 0 (262)
if x2 ≥ 0 : x2 x1 + f (x1 , x2 ) ≤ 0 (263)
⇒ f (x1 , x2 ) ≤ −x2 x1 (264)
if x2 < 0 : x2 x1 + f (x1 , x2 ) ≥ 0 (265)

⇒ f (x1 , x2 ) ≥ −x1 x2 (266)
both inequalities are fulfilled if
f (x1 , x2 ) = −x1 x2 (267)

⇒ x22 x1 + f (x1 , x2 )x2 = 0 (268)
non-linear part linear part

2 u1 x1 y1
u 1 = y2 æ1 0ö æ1 0ö
u2 ç ÷ x2 ç ÷ y2
u2 = - y1 y2 è0 1ø è0 1ø
B A C
æ -2 1 ö
ç ÷
è -1 -3 ø
Figure 34: theoretical structure
51
6 Hyperstability
plant
controller x&1 x1
x1 x&2 x2
u
x2 u = - x1 x2
æ -2 1 ö
ç ÷
è -1 -3 ø
Figure 35: real structure
Remarks: An additional measurement for x1 is necessary, because the

original output variable was only x2 !
52
7 Sliding-Mode Control
7.1 Sliding-mode control
a) A speed control for a car should be established using a sliding-mode

controller. The car is modeled as a lumped mass m, with the controller
output u as an accelerating force. The reference speed is constant at vd .
The friction force is given by
Ff = c · v 2 with c = 1. (269)
Assume the model to be exact, but there may be disturbance forces.

b) Now, the profile of the course is known and shown in figure 36.
200 m
20 km l
Figure 36: Profile of course
The profile shall be expressed by a sinusoidal function. The sliding-mode

speed control shall be improved by the knowledge about the course.
Hint: As the height is so much smaller than the length, the speed v is
still measured along the length l, and not the real speed along the course.
Also consider that the inclination angle is very small.
c) For the control of part b), draw a block diagram. Which part of the
controller fulfils which function?
53
Solution
a) A model in the following form is necessary:
x(n) (t) = f (x) + u(t) + d(t) (270)

T
with x = x, ẋ, . . . , x(n−1) and an unknown disturbance d(t).
Here x = v, n = 1 and x(n) = ẋ = a (acceleration).
1
u(t) − v 2 (t) + d(t)

a= (271)
m
1
That does not fit exactly to the model needed, because the factor m is
0
in front of u(t). Thus introduce an artificial controller output u (t):
1 2 0
v (n) (t) = −v (t) + u (t) + d(t) (272)
m
1
f (x) = − v 2 (t) (273)
m
d(t)
u¢ u 1 a v
m
m
1
m
v2
Figure 37: Improved block diagram of the model
General formula of the sliding mode controller:

0 (n)
u (t) = −f0 (x) + λT ė + xd + (F + D + η) · sgn (q) (274)
with the reference value xd , the vector e = e ė . . . e(n−1) using the

control error e = xd − x, the nominal model f0 (x), the bound F for the
model error f (x)−f0 (x), the bound D for the disturbance d(t), the value
54
η defining how fast the system approaches the sliding mode hypersurface,
and with λT and q as defined below.
(n−1)
δ
q(e) = +λ ·e (275)
δt
= e(n−1) + λT e (276)
here n = 1:
⇒ q(e) = e = e + λT e (277)
T
⇒ λ e=0 (278)
T
⇒ λ ė = 0 (279)
There is no model uncertainty here, so the model f (x) is identical to the

nominal model f0 (x), and the model error bound F = 0. The reference
velocity xd = vd is constant, therefore
(n)
xd = ẋd = 0 (280)
Using everything in the general formula (274) results in

0 1 2
⇒ u (t) = v + (D + η) · sgn (e) (281)
m
for the artificial controller, and
0
u(t) = m · u (t) = v 2 + m(D + η) · sgn (e) (282)
for the real controller, with e = vd − v.

b) The profile is causing a known disturbance on the speed control, the
braking force Fb by gravity g:
Fb α
α
mg
Figure 38: inclination angle, gravity and braking force
55
Fb = −mg · sin(α) (283)

The car is progressing along l, therefore we need α as a function of l. We
know that
0
tan(α) = h (l) (284)
0

⇒ Fb = −mg · sin arctan h (l) (285)
For small x, sin(x) ≈ x and arctan(x) ≈ x.

0
Fb ≈ −mg · h (l) (286)
The height profile as a function of the length l:

2π
h(l) = 1 − cos l · 100 m (287)
20 km

0 2π 2π
⇒ h (l) = sin ·l · 100 m (288)
20 km 20 km

2π π
= sin ·l (289)
20 km 100

2π π
⇒ Fb ≈ −mg · sin ·l (290)
20 km 100
Important: This sinus argument runs along a full 2π, it’s not the small
inclination angle α.
The model of the plant with braking force:

(n) 1 2 mgπ 2π
x (t) = u(t) − v (t) − · sin ·l + d(t) (291)
m 100 20 km

0 1 gπ 2π
= u (t) + − v 2 (t) − · sin ·l +d(t) (292)
m 100 20 km
| {z }
f0 (x)
In comparison to part a) additionally included is l, so the state is x = l,

with ẋ = v and n = 2. Continuing the sliding mode controller design:
n−1
δ
q(e) = +λ e = ė + λe = e(n−1) + λT e (293)
δt
⇒ λT e = λe (294)
⇒ λT ė = λė (295)
56
As the state is x = l, the reference xd has to be:
xd = vd · t (296)
(1)
⇒ xd = vd (297)
(2)
⇒ xd =0 (298)
Inserting everything into the general formula again:

(n)
u0 (t) = −f0 (x) + λT ė + xd + (F + D + η) sgn(q) (299)

1 2 2π π
= v + g · sin ·l + (300)
m 20 km 100
+ λė + (D + η) sgn(ė + λe) (301)
And with the real controller:
u(t) = m · u0 (t) (302)

2π π
= v 2 + mg sin ·l + mλė+ (303)
20 km 100
+ m(D + η) · sgn(ė + λe) (304)
The error and its derivative can be expressed as:
e = xd − x = vd · t − l (305)
⇒ ė = vd − v (306)
57
u 1 a v l
m
v2
mg×p sin 2p
100 20km
plant
controller
I
v2
II mg×p sin 2p
100 20km
III e&
ml vd
e&
+ IV sgn(e& +λe)
e
×m(D +η) e
–
e& = -le
Figure 39: Block diagram of control from part b)
c) As seen in figure 39:

I and II compensate the influence of the plant on x(n) .
III and IV are working independently.
III is a proportional velocity controller.
IV is a bang-bang controller that depends on sgn(ė + λe).
η: With η the speed of the controller is adjusted with which the sys-
tem approaches the hypersurface. Notice: the larger η is, the larger the
actuating variable has to be.
λ: Defines the hypersurface and in this way the time in which the error
is zeroed.
58
8 Gain Scheduling Controller
8.1 Task
For the plant given in the previous task, a gain-scheduling controller has to be
created.
a) Define suitable supporting points.
b) Compute the linear model for each of these points.
c) With the poles at −1, compute a linear controller for each point.
d) Check the overall stability.
Hint: Use the Theorem of Lyapunov Equation.
Solution
From a previous exercise the non-linear differential equation of the system is

known:
v 2 (t)

g·π 2·π 1
a(t) = v̇(t) = − · sin ·l − + · u(t) (307)
100 20 km m m
˙ = v(t)
l(t) (308)
a) Operating points should be defined at different at different slopes (max-

imal and minimal gradient of the height):
h
3
200 m
2 4
1 5
20 km l
Figure 40: Operating points
59
0
point(s) property gradient h (l)
1,3,5 no slope 0
2 max. gradient ≈ 0.031
4 min. gradient ≈ −0.031
b) The linearization is done by applying a first-order Taylor approximation

at the operating point u = u0 , l = l0 , v = v0 , a = a0 :

∂f ∂f ∂f
∆a = · ∆l + · ∆v + · ∆u (309)
∂l l=l0 ∂v v=v0 ∂u u=u0

∂f ∂ g·π 2·π
· ∆l = − · sin · l · ∆l (310)
∂l l0 ∂l 100 20 km
l0

g·π 2·π 2·π
=− · · cos · l · ∆l (311)
100 20 km 20 km l0
2

g·π 2·π
=− · cos · l0 ·∆l (312)
1000 km 20 km
| {z }
cl
= −cl · ∆l (313)
2
∂f ∂ v
· ∆v = − · ∆v (314)
∂v v0 ∂v m v0
2 · v0
=− · ∆v (315)
m

∂f 1
· ∆u = · ∆u (316)
∂u u0
m
2 · v0 1
∆a = −cl · ∆l − · ∆v + · ∆u (317)
m m
At different operating points, cl changes between its maximum value,

minimum value or zero.
60
˙

∆l 0 1 ∆l 0
˙ = 2v0 · + 1 ·∆u(t) (318)
∆v −c l − ∆v m
| {z } | {z m } | {z } |{z}
ẋ A x b
cl = f (l0 ) depends on the supporting point!

c) Before it is possible to start designing a controller for the linearized sys-
tem the controllability has to be checked first. The Kalman criterion is
used here.
" 1 #
0 1 0 m
Ab = 2·v0 · 1 = (319)
−cl − m m − 2·v0
2
m
1
" #
0 m
Qs = b Ab = 1 2·v0
(320)
m − m 2
1
det (Qs ) = − 6= 0 ⇔ rank (Qs ) = 2 (= n) (321)
m2
⇒ controllable! (322)
The system is controllable in all operating points. A pole placement

controller can be designed now using the Ackermann formula:
• desired poles:
s1/2 = −1 ⇒ (s + 1)2 = s2 + |{z}

2 ·s + |{z}
1 (323)
p1 p0
−1
• calculation of tT
1 (last row of Qs ):
" 2·v 1
#T
adj(Qs ) − m20 −m
Q−1
s = 2
= −m · 1
(324)
det(Qs ) −m 0

2 · v0 m
= (325)
m 0
tT

⇒ 1 = m 0 (326)
61
• calculation of the state controller f T

x:
fT T T
x = −p0 t1 − p1 t1 A − t1 A
T 2
(327)
" #
T
0 1
t1 A = m 0 · = 0 m (328)
−cl −2·v
m
0
" #
T 2
0 1
t1 A = 0 m · = −mc l −2v 0 (329)
−cl −2·v
m
0
fT

x = − m 0 − 2 0 m − −mcl −2v0 (330)

= mcl − m 2v0 − 2m (331)
d) The closed-loop system matrix is

0
A = A + bf T
x (332)
" # " #
0 1 0
= −2·v0
+ 1 · m(cl − 1) 2(v0 − m) (333)
−cl
" m
# "m #
0 1 0 0

0 1
= + = (334)
−cl −2·v 0
cl − 1 2·v0
− 2 −1 −2
m m
The eigenvalues are

0
λ −1
det λI − A =
= λ · (λ + 2) + 1 (335)
+1 λ + 2
!
= λ2 + 2λ + 1 = (λ + 1)2 =0 (336)
⇒ λ1/2 = −1 X (337)
Both eigenvalues are at −1. This result is not surprising because the
linearized system is controllable and the poles of the controlled system
have been placed at −1.
Here, the closed-loop system shows exactly the same behaviour in every
0
operating point, because A and its eigenvalues are not dependent on the
operating point (l0 , v0 )!
But generally, when a gain-scheduling controller is designed for different
operating points of a non-linear system, the closed-loop behaviour might
be different in every operating point. In that case, there will be different
0
matrices Ai for each operating point i.
62
If the behaviour of the closed-loop system varies at each operating point,

it is necessary to check the stability between operating points as well.
This can be done with the Theorem of Lyapunov Equation:
There must exist a common positive definite matrix P , so that

0T 0
Ai P + P Ai (338)
| {z }
Mi
is negative definite for all operating points! (Generally, this can be solved
as LMI-problem)
0 0
Here: Ai = A . It has to be shown that there exists a positive definite
P , so that
0T 0
M = A P + PA (339)
is negative definite. A matrix Q = −M can be introduced so that Q has

to be pos. definite.
0T 0
−Q = A P + P A (340)
0
In this case, with just one matrix A , there must be a positive definite
0
P if and only if all eigenvalues of A have negative real part. This is
fulfilled (calculated above), so the system is stable, even during changes
of the operating points.
63
9 Exam 1 - Autumn 2010
9.1 Task
a) Describe the basic idea of the stability definition by Lyapunov, both for
simple and asymptotic stability.
b) Explain the basic idea of the direct method by Lyapunov. Use a drawing
in the state plane.
c) The Lyapunov function V (x1 , x2 ) = (x1 )2 + (x1 )3 + (x2 )2 is given. The
time derivative of this function is always negative for a given System
and the neutral position (0,0). You do not need to proove this. By the
Lyapunov function, what can be said about the stability of this neutral
position?
Solution
a) A position of rest xR is said to be stable for a given constant input value

u0 if and only if for every e > 0 a δ > 0 can be found such that for any
|x(0) − xR | < δ the condition |x(t) − xR | < η(t ≥ 0) is satisfied.
A position of rest xR is said to be asymptotically stable if it is stable for

any constant activation u0 , and if it possesses a β-region where lim x(t) =
t→∞
xR for |x(0) − xR | < β, i.e. there exists a region, where from any initial
state inside this region the system converges towards the position of rest.
b) V is 0 when x = 0 and increases for every direction. V̇ is negativ for
every x (except for 0). Therefore, x converges to 0. This is also true for
a limited domain of attraction.
64
x2
x1
Figure 41: Direct method of Lyapunov drawing in the state plane
c) V = x21 + x31 + x22 grows in the negative x1 direction until x1 = − 32 .

ˆ |x| < 23 is asymptotically
Therefore, according to Lyapunov, the area H =
stable.
9.2 Task
For application of the Popov criterion the characteric curve of the nonlinear
part has to run through a specific sector.
a) Sketch the ”standard control loop” from the lecture, consisting of a non-
linear and a linear transfer part.
b) Expand the control loop for the case, in which a sector transformation of
the nonlinear part is needed.
c) For the expanded control loop, what is the transfer behavior of the linear
part?
Solution
a) See figure 42.
w e u y
f(e) G(jω)
Figure 42: Standard control loop
65
b) See figure 43.
k1
ft (e)
w e u ut u y
f(e) G(jω)
- kt
Figure 43: Standard control loop expanded
c)
y(s) = G(s) · (ut (s)k1 · y(s)) (341)

⇒ y(s)(1 + k1 G(s)) = G(s)ut (s) (342)
y(s) G(s)
⇒ Gt (s) = = (343)
ut (s) 1 + k1 G(s)
9.3 Task
A standard control loop, consisting of a linear and a nonlinear part, is given.

The nonlinear part contains no inner dynamics. The linear part is instable.
The number of input and output variables is the same.
a) Draw the given standard control loop into a block diagram. Leave room
for expansions.
b) Expand the control loop to adapt it for use of the hyperstability criterion.
Draw these expansions into your block diagram.
c) What was the intent of these expansions?
d) What is the transfer behavior of the linear part now? Take the state
equations of the original linear part and derive the state equations of the
expanded part.
66
e) After the expansion, what else is needed to proove stability of the overall
closed loop system?
Solution
a) The standard control loop can be seen figure 44 in black.
D D
¢
f (e) G ¢(s)
w e u u¢ u y
f G(s)
K K
Figure 44: Standard control loop in black with expansions in red and blue
b) The extentions can be seen in figure 44 in blue and red.

c) K in G0 (s) stabilizes the linear part
K and D in f 0 (e) ensure an unmodified system.
D makes the system positively real.
d)
y(s)
= G(s) (344)
u(s)
y(s) = G(s) · (u0 (s) − K · y(s)) (345)
0
y(s)(I + G · K) = G · u (s) (346)
y(s)
= G · (I + GK)−1 + D (347)
u0 (s)
67
e) Equation (348) has to be proven for all T > 0 to ensure the hyperstability
of the transformed, nonlinear part of the system.
Z T
u0T e0 dt ≥ −β02 (348)
0
68
10 Exam 2 - Spring 2011
10.1 Task
The following control loop is given. The controller is a 3-point controller with
a given tolerance region, and the output values (−1, 0, 1). The factor k is an
adjustable gain and part of the controller. The plant consists of an integrator
plus a 2nd order lag that may oscillate.
w u x1 y
k
With help of the factor k the control loop shall be tuned, so that at a constant
reference value w a constant control value y is the result, with the control error
lies inside the controller tolerance region:
|w − y| < e (349)
a) Describe your considerations concerning the choice of the parameter k.

Describe the control loop behavior once for the case of k being too large
and once for the case of k being right. Also describe the time course of
the state variable x1 in detail.
b) If the three-step controller shows a hysteresis behavior: What general
effect does this have on the choice of k? Explanation!
Solution
a) The parameter k should not be too large because otherwise the reaction
of y is delayed. Therefore x1 integrates towards a higher value causing
the controller to counter steer and causing an oscillation.
If k is small enough, u becomes 0 and x1 a constant value causing y to
converge towards w.
69
b) If the controller shows a hysteresis behavior, k has to be chosen very

small. Otherwise the shift in the back and forth jumps of the controller
can be seen as a time lag, causing the system to become unstable.
10.2 Task
a) Explain in your own words, what a position of rest is.

b) Write down the basic idea of the definition of stability by Lyapunov, both
for simple and asymptotic stability.
c) With the help of the Lyapunov stability definition, examine the stability
of a second-order lag for the following cases:
• for D ≥ 1
• for D = √1
2
• for 0 < D < √1

2
Explain if we get instability, simple or asymptotic stability, and give an

argument for your answer. Use the stability definition and not the direct
method. A simple descriptive (graphic) explanation is enough.
d) The linear system with the following system matrix is given:

−1 1
(350)
−2 −1
Prove the system stability by use of a Lyapunov function of the type

V (x) = a(x1 )2 + b(x2 )2 . a and b can be choosen as needed. Explain if we
have global and/or asymptotic stability.
Hint: First calculate, then choose a and b at the end of your calculation.
Solution
a) A position of rest xR is said to be stable for a given constant input value

70
b) A position of rest xR is said to be asymptotically stable if it is stable for

any constant activation u0 , and if it possesses a β-region where lim x(t) =
t→∞
xR for |x(0) − xR | < β, i.e. there exists a region, where from any initial
state inside this region the system converges towards the position of rest.
c) • The system converges towards the position of rest without over-
shooting , thus it is, according to Lyapunov, asymptotically stable.
• The system converges towards the position of rest with finite over-
shoots, thus it is , according to Lyapunov, asymptotically stable.
• The system converges towards the position of rest with finite over-
shoots, thus it is , according to Lyapunov, asymptotically stable.
d)

−1 1
ẋ = x (351)
−2 −1
!
V (x) = ax21 + bx22 = 0 is fulfilled when a > 0 and b > 0.
V̇ = 2a · x1 · ẋ1 + 2b · x2 · ẋ2 (352)

= 2a · x1 (−x1 + x2 ) + 2b · x2 (−2x1 − x2 ) (353)
!
= −2a · x21 + 2a · x1 · x2 − 4b · x1 · x2 − 2b · x22 < 0 (354)
Therefore, the condition is fulfilled when a = 2b. For example when a = 2
and b = 1, there is a global stability and xR = [0, 0]T is an asymptotic
stable position of rest.
10.3 Task
With the help of the Popov Criterion shown in figure 46 to be stable for all
characteristic curves that lie in the sector (−1, 1).
w 1 y
s+3
71
Remember: The Popov inequality is:

−1
Re {(1 + jqω)G(jω)} > (355)
k
It is not necessary to use the Popov plot.
Solution
ft (e) = f (e) − k1 e = f (e) + e (356)

1
G s+3 1
Gt (e) = = 1 = (357)
1 + k1 G 1 − s+3 s+2
! 1 1
Re {(1 + jqω)Gt (jω)} > − =− (358)
k2 − k1 2

1
= Re (1 + jqω) (359)
jω + 2

1
= Re (1 + jqω)(jω − 2) (360)
−ω 2 − 4
−2 − qω 2 ! 1
= >− (361)
−ω 2 − 4 2
!
⇒ 4 + 2qω 2 > −4 − ω 2 (362)
!
⇒ 8 + (2q + 1)ω 2 > 0 (363)
⇒ stable (364)
10.4 Task
With the help of the circle criterion, show the system in figure 46 to be stable.
As the circle criterion is derived from the small gain theorem, you can proof
stability directly with the small gain theorem instead.
Which symmetrical sector limits would be possible at maximum? Use either

the circle criterion or the small gain theorem, as before.
72
Solution
G(s)
A stable system Gt = 1+km ·G(s) has to be formed with km = 21 (k1 + k2 ) = 0.
Im
1
3
Re
1 1
-1 = - 1= -
k2 k1
The curve in figure 47 lies outside of the forbidden area and thus in the circle
with radius 1.
1
Provided that G(s) is stable ⇒ s+3 is stable as long as sm = −3 < 0.
1
||f ||∞ · ||G||∞ = 1 · <1 (365)
3
⇒ stable
⇒ fmax = 3 i.e. k1 = −3 and k2 = 3.
Therefore the system is stable with |k1 | = |k2 | = 3 as a maximum value.
73
11.1 Task
Given is the following control loop with a 3-point controller with internal feed-
back:
controller
x1
w e u y
First, assume that the internal feedback does not exist. The tolerance zone of
the controller e shall be much smaller than one. For a step input (w switches
from 0 to 1) draw the course of all variables w, e, u, x1 , and y. At the beginning,
all variables shall be zero.
a) Assume, that the integrator time constant is so large, that e will not leave
the tolerance interval of the controller any more after reaching it.
b) Now assume a smaller integrator time constant. e will reach the toler-
ance interval of the controller, but then it will get too large in negative
direction, so that the controller has to switch to its negative output value.
c) (Option) Now, the internal feedback is activated. Again, for the same
step input, draw all internal system variables, including h.
Solution
a) See figure 49 (blue dashed curves).

b) See figure 49 (green dotted curves).
74
c) See figure 49 (red curves).
1
w
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
t
1
e
0
-1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
t
1
0
h
-1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
t
5
0
u
-5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
t
4
2
x
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
t
2
1
y
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
t
Figure 49: Behavior of the variables in the system for different scenarios
75
11.2 Task
Given is a system consisting of the series connection of two first-order lags.

Prove the stability of this system using the Direct Method of Lyapunov. Choose
the Lyapunov function:
V = ax21 + bx22 (366)
First, write down the state space equations of the system without external
input, where you can assume each time constant being 1 s. These equations
you just have to insert later. Then, start the proof with unknown parameters
a, b. If you do a case-by-case analysis depending on the sign and the values of
x1 and x2 , you will find out, what a and b have to satisfy to prove stability.
Solution
T1 : ẋ1 + x1 = V1 · u = 0 (367)
⇒ ẋ1 = −x1 (368)
T2 : ẋ2 + x2 = V2 · x1 (369)
⇒ ẋ2 = V2 · x1 − x2 (370)
!
V = ax21 + bx22 > 0 (371)
⇒ a>0∧b>0 (372)
V̇ = 2a · x1 · ẋ1 + 2b · x2 · ẋ2 (373)

= −2ax21 + 2b2 x2 (V2 x1 − x2 ) (374)
= −2ax21 − 2bx22
+ 2V2 bx1 x2 (375)
2 2 !
1 1
= −2b x22 − V2 x1 x2 + V 2 x1 − V2 x1 − 2ax21 (376)
2 2
2
1 1
= −2b x2 − V2 x1 + bV22 x21 − 2ax21 (377)
2 2
2
1 1 2 !
= −2b x2 − V2 x1 − 2a − bV2 x21 < 0 (378)
2 2
76

1 2
⇒ b > 0 ∧ 2a − bV2 > 0 (379)
2
⇒ b > 0 ∧ 4a > bV22 (380)
with (372) ⇒ 0 < bV22 < 4a (381)
77
12.1 Task
Give Lyapunov’s definition of stability with your own words. Use a drawing
for explanation. Explain also the difference between normal and asymptotical
stability, as well as the domain of attraction of a rest point.
Solution
A position of rest xR is said to be stable for a given constant input value

x2
e
d xR
x0 x1
Figure 50: Lyapunov: position of rest
A position of rest xR is said to be asymptotically stable if it is stable for any

constant activation u0 , and if it possesses a β-region where lim x(t) = xR for
t→∞
|x(0) − xR | < β, i.e. there exists a region, where from any initial state inside
this region the system converges towards the position of rest. The set of all
initial states from which the system converges to xR is called the position of
rest’s domain attraction.
78
x2
x1
xR x0
Figure 51: Lyapunov: asymptotically stable
12.2 Task
Check the stability of a double integrator with the help of the direct method
of Lyapunov. First, imagine the behavior of the system: What happens, if
the state variables take certain values? After that, you may choose a very
simple Lyapunov function and do the necessary considerations. You will have
to separate between different cases. And especially, the special cases of the
theorem will appear.
Remark: The direct method can be used to prove stability or instability.
Solution
u x1 x2
Figure 52: Two integrators
Assumption: u = 0
if x1 6= 0 ⇒ x2 → ±∞
if x1 = 0 ⇒ x2 = constant ⇒ position of rest
but with x = 0 as position of rest
only for x0 = 0 (trivial) ⇒ unstable
79
V = x21 + x22 (382)

V̇ = 2x1 ẋ1 + 2x2 ẋ2 (383)
⇒ V̇ = 2x1 x2 (384)
for x1 > 0; x2 < 0 or x1 < 0; x2 > 0 ⇒ V̇ < 0

for x1 = 0 or x2 = 0 ⇒ V̇ = 0
for x1 > 0; x2 > 0 or x1 < 0; x2 < 0 ⇒ V̇ > 0
x2
V& < 0 V& > 0

x1
V& > 0 V& < 0
Figure 53: Value of V̇ in relation to the quadrants
no region around x = [0 0] is possible with V̇ < 0. Therefore the system is

unstable.
12.3 Task
Given is a transfer element with the characteristic curve shown in figure 54.
u
m
-a e
a
m
80
m is the inclination of the branches.
a) Sketch the behavior of the output signal, if the input is a sine wave, for
different amplitudes A < a; A > a; A a.
b) Does describing function depend on the frequency here? Give the reason.
c) Imagine yourself the behavior of the describing function N (A). Sketch
it in a diagram, depending on the signal amplitude A. Mark important
points in the curve.
d) What is the condition, so that this transfer element as controller together
with a 2nd -order lag as plant will give a stable closed-loop system?
e) What is the condition, so that this transfer element as controller together
with a 3rd -order lag as plant will give a stable closed-loop system?
Solution
a) See figures 55, 56 and 57.
0.6
0.4
0.2
x,y
0
-0.2
-0.4
0 2 4 6 8 10
t
Figure 55: behavior of the output (green) and input (sine wave in blue and
dashed) signal with A < a
81
x,y 1
-1
-2
0 2 4 6 8 10
t
dashed) signal with A > a
10
5
x,y
-5
-10
0 2 4 6 8 10
t
dashed) signal with A a
b) The describing function is not dependent on the frequency.

c) See figure 58.
82
N(A)
A
a
Figure 58: Describing function
1
d) The curves of the PT2 -element and of − N (A) meet at the origin (figure
59): ∆ϕPT2 = 0 = ∆ϕ ⇒ stable.
Im
Re
1 PT2
-
N(A)
Figure 59: Nyquist plot of N (A) and PT2
1
e) Depending on V , the PT3 and − N (A) can either intersect to the left
1
of the point − m or the curve runs to the right of the point causing no
intersection (figure 60). If there is an intersection, the system is unstable:
∆ϕ = 2π 6= 0 = ∆ϕ ⇒ unstable. If there is no intersection, it is
stable: ∆ϕ = 0 = ∆ϕ ⇒ stable.
83
Im
Re
1
-
m
1 PT3
-
N(A)
Figure 60: Nyquist plot of N (A) and PT3 when V is large
12.4 Task
A standard loop is given, consisting of a linear and a nonlinear part:
k(t)
w u y
Figure 61: Standard loop
With the help of Hyperstability Theory check the conditions for k(t), so that
the closed loop will be stable.
Hint: First, you have to enlarge the entire system to make the linear part
positive real.
Solution
1
G(s) = s is not stable. Therefore feedbacks are included as seen in figure 62.
84
k(t)
w e¢ u¢ y
-1
Figure 62: Expanded system
1
G0 (s) = (385)
s+1
G0 (s) is stable and positiv real ⇒ hyperstable.
f0 : (386)
0 0 0
u = k(t) · e − e (387)
0
= (k(t) − 1)e (388)
0
⇒ f = (k(t) − 1) (389)
Z T Z T
0 0
f e dt = (k(t) − 1)e02 dt 6≥ −β02 (390)
0 0
This is fulfilled for:
(k(t) − 1) ≥ 0 (391)
k(t) ≤ 1 (392)
Therefore the closed-loop system is stable.
12.5 Task
We have a plant consisting of a 1st-order lag with a piecewise linear character-

istic curve:
T
u y
85
The characteristic curve can be described as a variable, known gain Vs of the

plant. Design a control, so that the closed-loop system always acts like a
1st - order lag with time constant T. You can use a relatively simple, classical
controller type as basis of your gain scheduling concept.
Solution
1
ẋ1 = (u − x1 ) (393)
T
1
x1 = u (394)
Ts + 1
y = V (x1 ) · x1 (395)
kv (x1 )(Ti s + 1)V (x1 )

GPI−controller = with Ti = T (396)
Ti s(T s + 1) + kv (x1 )(Ti s + 1)V (x1 )
1
= Ti
(397)
kv (x1 )(V (x1 )) s + 1
1
kv (x1 ) = with Ti = 1 (398)
V (x1 ]
86
V kv
Þ
x1 x1
Figure 65: Curve
87
13.1 Task
a) Given is a 2-point controller with hysteresis, and an integrator should be

controlled. Sketch the course over time of the output of the control loop,
if the reference value is a step function from zero to one.
b) Now assume, that there is a deadtime in the feedback. Sketch again the
course over time of the output of the control loop.
c) Now add one integrator behind the closed loop and sketch the course of
the state vector in the state plane for both cases.
Solution
a) See figure 67.
w e u x1 = y
88
1.5
y 1
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4
t
Figure 67: Output of a 2-point controller with hysteresis and an integrator
b) See figure 69.
w e u x1 = y
TL
Figure 68: Block Diagram
89
1.5
y 1
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4
t
Figure 69: Output of a 2-point controller with hysteresis and an integrator with
a deadtime in the feedback
c) See figure 71 for case a) represented by the blue curve and case b) repre-
sented by the green dashed curve.
w e u x1 = y y ¢= x2
TL
90
x2
0
0
x1
Figure 71: Behavior of state vector in state plane for case a) and b)
13.2 Task
Given is a transfer element with the following characteristic curve:
-a e
a
-a
a) Sketch the behavior of the output signal, if the input is a sine wave, for
different amplitudes A < a; A > a; A a.
b) Does the describing function depend on the frequency here? Give the
reason.
c) Imagine yourself the behavior of the describing function N (A). Sketch
it in a diagram, depending on the signal amplitude A. Mark important
points in the curve.
91
d) What is the condition, so that this transfer element as controller together

with a 2nd -order lag as plant will give a stable closed-loop system?
e) What is the condition, so that this transfer element as controller together
with a 3rd -order lag as plant will give a stable closed-loop system?
Solution
a) See figures 73, 74 and 75.
1
w,y
-1
0 5 10
t
Figure 73: behavior of output (green and dashed curve) und input (sine wave
in blue) signal for A < a
1
w,y
-1
0 5 10
t
Figure 74: behavior of output (green and dashed) und input (sine wave in blue)
signal for A > a
92
10
x 10
1
w,y
0
-1
0 5 10
t
Figure 75: behavior of output (in blue) und input (sine wave in green and
dashed) signal for A a
b) The describing function is not frequency dependent because it is not

influenced by the time.
c) See figure 76
N(A)
Figure 76: Describing Function
1
77). ∆ϕ = 0 = ∆ϕ ⇒ stable.
93
Im
Re
1 PT2
-
N(A)
1
e) The curves of the PT3 -element and of − N (A) intersect (figure 78). For
the points left of the intersection: ∆ϕ = 0 = ∆ϕ ⇒ stable. For the
points right of the intersection: ∆ϕ = 2π 6= ∆ϕ ⇒ unstable.
Im
Re
1 PT3
-
N(A)
94
13.3 Task
The following structure is given. A ball is moving on the sketched height profile.
Discuss the stability of the ball position in A, if
a) B is higher than A.
b) B is lower than A.
c) instead of B there is only a saddle point in the curve.
B
A
Figure 79: Sketched height profile
Solution
The ball starts to roll to the point A from the areas marked in figure 80 by a fat
line. Thus it is asymptotically stable. If the ball starts at a different position,
it rolls into point B and is not globally stable in regard to point A.
The three different ball positions do not have a different effect on the stability.
The only difference is that the marked areas are smaller when there is only a
saddle point in the curve instead of point B.
B
A
Figure 80: Structure of ball moving on the sketched height profile with marked
areas
95
13.4 Task
A standard control loop is given, consisting of a linear and a nonlinear part:
2
k(t)
w u y
With the help of Hyperstability Theory check the conditions for k(t), so that
the closed loop will be stable. Hint: First, you have to enlarge the entire
system to make the linear part positive real.
Solution
1
G(s) = 2 + s is not stable.
2s + 1 2s + 1
⇒ G0 (s) = = (399)
s + (2s + 1)k2 (1 + 2k2 )s + k2
k2
⇒ s∞ =− (400)
1 + 2k2
⇒ k2 < − 12 and k2 > 0 ⇒ G0 (s) has stable poles ⇒ G0 (s) positive

real for k2 > 0
96
Im
Re
k2 < 0 k2 > 0
⇒ G0 (s) hyperstable for k2 > 0
k1 k2
k(t) 2
w e u u¢ y
Figure 83: Transformed system
97
f 0 : u0 = (k(t)) · e − e · k2 = (k(t) − k2 ) · e (401)

Z T Z T
!
0
f e dt = ((k(t) − k2 )e2 dt ≥ −β02 (402)
0 0
⇒ k(t) ≥ k2 (403)
largest possible area k(t) > 0

⇒ non-linear part fulfills integral
⇒ closed-loop system is stable
13.5 Task
With the help of a block diagram and the complex plane, describe how to apply
the circle criterion (incl. sector transformation).
Solution
Gt has only poles with a negative real part.
ft Gt
w u ut u y
f(m) G(t)
km km
Figure 84:
98
1
km = (k1 + k2 ) (404)
2
1 1 1
r= − (405)
2 k1 k2

1 1 1
m=− + (406)
2 k1 k2
Im
r
Stable
Re
m
G(jω)
Figure 85: Nyquist plot for k1 , k2 > 0
99
Im
Stable
Re
m
G(jω)
Figure 86: Nyquist plot for k1 < 0 < k2
Im
Stable
Re
G(jω)
1
-
k2
Figure 87: Nyquist plot for k1 = 0, k2 > 0
100
Im Stable
Re
G(jω)
1
-
k1
Figure 88: Nyquist plot for k1 < 0, k2 = 0
101
14.1 Task
A heating control is given, which consists of a switching controller and inte-

grating actuator (valve). The hot water system can be modelled as first-order
lag with gain equal to one. The controller output is u, the actuator output is
x, and the control variable (temperature) is y.
a) Sketch the behavior of the above mentioned variables for a 2-point con-
troller with hysteresis, if the reference value is constant. Sketch x and y
in the same diagram.
b) Now do the same for an ideal 2-point controller.
c) Now do the same for an ideal 3-point controller.
d) Keep the 3-point controller. Sketch the behavior of the above mentioned
variables, if in the winter someone opens the window, so that the tem-
perature cannot reach the tolerance band of the controller, because it is
too cold.
e) The window shall be closed again, and the 3-point controller is still active.
Now the actuating valve shall be replaced by a very fast actuating valve.
Sketch again the behavior of the above mentioned variables. Is the control
behavior now better or worse than before?
Solution
T2 T1
w e u x y
K
a) See figure 90.
102
0
u
-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
4
2
x,y
-2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
Figure 90: behavior of x (blue curve), y (green and dashed curve) and u for a
2-point controller with hysteresis
b) See figure 91.
103
0
u
-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2 t
x,y
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
Figure 91: behavior of x (blue curve), y (green and dahsed curve) and u for an
ideal 2-point controller
c) See figure 92.
0
u
-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
1.5
1
x,y
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
Figure 92: behavior of x (blue curve), y (green and dashed curve) and u for an
ideal 3-point controller
104
d) In figure 93 the red curves represent the behavior as shown in figure 92

and the blue curves represent the behavior with the interference.
0
u
-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
4
2
x,y
-2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
t
Figure 93: behavior of x, y and u for an ideal 3-point controller with an in-
terference (blue curves) in comparison to without interference (red,
dashed curves)
e) The control behavior is worse because the system cannot keep up with
the controller. Thus the tolerance area is left a couple of times until the
system converges to its position of rest. Additionally, a larger amplitude
can be seen.
14.2 Task
Given is a transfer element with the the input-output function y = sgn(x) x2 .
a) Sketch the behavior of the output signal, if the input is a sine wave.
b) Does the describing function depend on the frequency here? Give the
reason.
c) Sketch the describing function roughly.
105
d) Assume a closed-loop system, consisting of this transfer element as con-

troller together with a 2nd -order lag as plant. Discuss the stability.
e) Assume a closed-loop system, consisting of this transfer element as con-
troller together with a 3rd -order lag as plant. Discuss the stability.
f) Assume a closed-loop system, consisting of this transfer element as con-
troller together with a deadtime element as plant. Discuss the stability.
Hint: For stability analysis mention, if the describing function increases or

decreases for increasing input amplitudes.
Solution
a) See figure 94.
1
x,y
-1
0 2 4 6 8 10
t
Figure 94: behavior of output (green, dashed curve) and input (sine wave in
blue) signal
b) The describing function does not depend on the frequency because it is

not influenced by time.
c)
Z π
1
N (A) = sgn(A sin(t)) · A2 sin2 (t) · sin(t) dt (407)
Aπ 0
A2 π 3
Z
= sin (t) dt (408)
Aπ 0
= Ac (409)
106
N(A)
A
Figure 95: Describing function
1
96), ∆ϕnecessary = 0 = ∆ϕ ⇒ stable.
Im
Re
1 PT2
-
N(A)
1
1
e) The curves of the PT3 -element and of − N (A) meet at −5 (figure 97). For
the points left from the intersection ∆ϕnecessary = ∆ϕ and for the points
right from the intersection this does not apply. Therefore the system is
unstable.
107
Im
Re
-5
1 PT3
-
N(A)
1
1
f) The deadtime and − N (A) meet left of −1 (figure 98). For the points left
from the intersection ∆ϕnecessary ≈ ∆ϕ and for the points right from the
intersection this does not apply. Therefore the system is unstable.
Im
-1 Re
1
-
N(A)
1
108
14.3 Task
Figure 99: double-inverted pendulum
Prove the stability of the position of rest of the double-inverted pendulum

above with the help of Lyapunov’s direct method.
Solution
asymptotally stable,
not globally unstable
unstable unstable
Figure 100: Four different cases for the position of rest
All positions of rest in figure 100, except for the third case, are unstable. The
third is asymptotically, however not globally, stable because the pendulum
always returns to the position of rest (u = 0) from any point.
109
14.4 Task
k1 k2
w y
x × 2x
With the help of Hyperstability Theory check the condition(s) for k1 and k2 ,
so that the closed loop will be stable. k2 is part of the plant, but can be chosen
here without any restrictions.
Solution
Check if G(s) is stable:

1
s 1
G(s) = = (410)
1− k2 1s s − k2
⇒ stable for k2 < 0 and G(s) is positive real ⇒ G(s) is hyperstable

Z Z
u · e dt = (2e + k1 e)e dt (411)
Z
= (2e2 + k1 e2 ) dt ≥ −β 2 (412)
fulfilled for k1 > 0

⇒ the whole system is stable for k1 > 0 and k2 < 0
or:
Redraw k1 in the system
1
G(s) = (413)
s − k2 + k1
110
stable for k2 < k1 , G(s) is positive real ⇒ G(s) is hyperstable
Z Z
u · e dt = e2 dt ≥ −β 2 (414)
⇒ fulfilled
⇒ whole system stable for k1 > k2
111
15.1 Task
A first-order lag with gain V shall be controlled by a switching element. The

reference value w jumps from zero to two at t = 0. For the following questions,
sketch the course over the time (not in the state-space), of the reference value
w, the actuating variable u and the output variable y.
a) The switching element is an ideal 2-point-element with output values ±1.
The plant gain is V = 1.
b) The switching element is an ideal 2-point-element with output values ±1.
The plant gain is V = 3.
c) The switching element is a 2-point-element with hysteresis with output
values ±1. The plant gain is V = 3.
d) The switching element is an ideal 3-point-element with output values
0, ±1. The plant gain is V = 3.
15.2 Task
Given is a nonlinear transfer element with the sketched transfer behaviour,

which is continued to infinity. The dotted line has got the gradient one.
a) Sketch the course of the output signal, if the input is a sine wave. Choose
the amplitude of the input signal large enough, so that one can see clearly
the principle of the transfer behaviour.
b) Sketch the describing function N (A) and mark important values.
c) Against which value does this function converge?
troller together with a 2nd-order lag as plant. Discuss the stability.
troller together with a 3rd-order lag as plant. Discuss the stability.
112

troller together with an integrator and a 1st-order lag as plant. Discuss
the stability.
15.3 Task
Prove the stability of the position of rest of the spring-mass system above with
the help of Lyapunov’s direct method.
Figure 102: Spring-mass system
15.4 Task
A standard control loop is given, consisting of a linear and a nonlinear part.

The linear part is an integrator, and the nonlinear part is given by the function
u = f (e) = e3 − ae (415)
With the help of Hyperstability theory calculate a value for a, so that the
closed loop will be stable.
113
16.1 Task
The following control loop is given, consisting of two ideal 2-point switching
elements and two integrators. The initial values of all variables are zero.
y1 x1 y2 x2
-
TI,1 TI,2
a) Sketch the course of the output variables of all transfer elements over the
time, assuming a step function at the input of the control loop.
b) Give the maximum and minimum values of x1 and x2 (values might
depend on the time constants of the integrators).
c) Sketch the course of the two state variables in the state plane. Is the
system stable (give reason)?
d) Now assume, that the output of the second switching element is multi-
plied by -1. Sketch again the course of the output variables of all transfer
elements over the time, assuming a step function at the input of the
control loop.
e) Sketch the course of the two state variables in the state plane. Is the
system stable (give reason)?
114
16.2 Task

which is continued to infinity. The dotted line has got a slope of 1.
c) Assume a closed-loop system, consisting of this transfer element as con-
troller together with an integrator and a 1st-order lag as plant. Discuss
the stability.
troller together with a lead (PD) plus double integrator as plant. Discuss
the stability.
Hint: G(s) = TTDIs+1
s2
g) Now do the stability analysis with the help of the circle criterion.
115
16.3 Task
Explain the direct method of Lyapunov and prove the stability of the zero
position of rest of the following system with the help of Lyapunov’s direct
method.

−1 −1
A= (416)
0 −2

1
B= (417)
−1
16.4 Task

The linear part is a second-order lag, and the nonlinear part is given by the
function below, where k(t) is a time-varying function. Analyse the stability of
this system in principal, with the help of hyperstability theory. Detailed values
are not required.
u = f (e) = k(t) ∗ e (418)
116
17.1 Task
Figure is missing here
Given is a non-linear transfer element with the sketched transfer behaviour,

troller together with delay element with variable gain as plant: G(s) =
V e−T s Discuss the stability.
17.2 Task
Explain the direct method of Lyapunov and prove the stability of the zero
position of rest of the following system with the help of Lyapunov’s direct
method.

−2 1
A= (419)
1 −1

1
B= (420)
−1
117
17.3 Task

The linear part is a second-order lag, and the non-linear part is given by the
function below, where k(t) is a time-varying function. Analyse the stability of
this system in principal, with the help of hyperstability theory. Detailed values
are not required.
u = f (e) = k(t) ∗ e (421)
17.4 Task
The control loop above is given. It consists of a PI controller, a non-linear

function, and a first-order lag. The first-order lag has got the gain V = 1 and
the delay time T = 1s. The nonlinear function is given as follows:
 1 2
 2u : u>1
f (u) = u : −1 ≤ u ≤ +1 (422)
 1 2
− 2 u : u < −1
a) Following the idea of gain scheduling, design a PI controller for the set
points u = −3, −2, −1, +1, +2, +3 and describe shortly, how the gain
scheduling controller works. The objective is, that the closed loop system
behavior is more or less equal over the complete working range.
b) Generally, this system can be controlled without gain scheduling, using
a simple PI controller. What does this mean for the closed-loop system?
c) A nonlinear compensation would be even better and more elegant than
the gain scheduling controller. How could it look like here?
118
18.1 Task

e) Assume a closed-loop system, consisting of an integral controller, this
transfer element as actuator and a 1st-order lag as plant. Discuss the
stability.
119
18.2 Task
Prove the stability of the given system (not only for one position of rest) with
the help of Lyapunov’s direct method. Integrator time constant as well as the
gain and time constant of the first-order lag can have any value.
18.3 Task
The given plant shall be controlled by a controller with a static, nonlinear

characteristic curve. Find the maximum possible sector for this curve with
the help of the Circle Criterion. If the exact calculation of sector bounds is
impossible, describe the sector with your own words, but give a reason why.
After that, assume a conventional P-controller and analyze the stability with
a method of your choice. Compare the results.
18.4 Task
For the plant of task 18.3, design a gain scheduling controller.
120
18.5 Task

The linear part is shown in the block diagram above, and the nonlinear part
is given by the function below, where k(t) is a time-varying function. Analyse
the stability of this system in principal, with the help of hyperstability theory.
u = f (e) = k(t) ∗ e (423)
121

Nonlinear Systems - Tutorials PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Nonlinear Systems - Tutorials PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Kai Michels

8 Gain Scheduling Controller 59

9 Exam 1 - Autumn 2010 64

10 Exam 2 - Spring 2011 69

11 Exam 3 - Autumn 2011 74

12 Exam 4 - Spring 2012 78

13 Exam 5 - Autumn 2012 88

14 Exam 6 - Spring 2013 102

15 Exam 7 - Autumn 2013 112

16 Exam 8 - Spring 2014 114

17 Exam 9 - Autumn 2014 117

18 Exam 10 - Spring 2015 119

For the system shown in figure 1, y will perform square-wave oscillations as

Figure 2: Behavior of y and y1

Assumption: Steady state condition ⇒ y1 begins at t0 on a switching thresh-

There is a switchover point at t1 :

Figure 3: IT2 -plant with 2-point controller

A system with an integrator at its input and a second-order lag element

The symbol ¯ represents the mean value of a variable.

GR (s = 0) = 1 GR is steady-state accurate. (11)

Figure 4: Switching element with PT1 and integrator

From equations (23) and (24) l can be calculated for t = t1 .

l (t1 ) = w = u0 t1 e−1 (27)

Next we want to compare amplitudes of the two quarter periods. It is known

Using equations (48), (50) and (51):

⇒ l (t2 ) < 2w (52)

Figure 6: Switching element with two integrators

With a step for w as an input signal, derive a, v and l as functions of time by

Figure 7: Switching Controller with two PT1 -elements

Figure 8: Switching Controller

a) Determine the equilibrium point(s) of the system for w = 2e0 .

|ur | < u0 ⇒ linear range (57)

Open loop transfer function:

|ur | ≥ u0 ⇒ non-linear range (65)

In the non-linear range, u is always equal to plus or minus u0 . The plant

Position of rest of non-linear range:

[w, yr , ur ] = [2e0 , ±u0 V1 V2 , ±u0 ] (67)

Figure 9: General form of a standard control loop

Figure 10: Control loop

f 0 (∆e) = f (∆e + 2e0 − yr ) − ur (68)

d) As a first step, it is necessary to check if the system is in the linear or

[w, yr , ur ] = [2e0 , 2e0 , 0] (75)

For the non-linear system shown in figure 11,

Figure 11: Non-linear system with two PT1 -elements

a) Determine the equilibrium points.

An equilibrium point is a position of rest, which is a steady state. In

b) A Lyapunov-function has to be found. The standard approach is

V̇ (x) = λ1 x21 + λ2 x22 (85)

V is positive definite (all eigenvalues > 0) and grows unlimited with

V̇ (x) = 2λ1 · x1 · ẋ1 + 2λ2 · x2 · ẋ2 (86)

The Lyapunov-function must decrease, so

Figure 12: Range of decreasing Lyapunov-Function in state space

c can be chosen arbitrarily: c := 1

V = V22 · x21 + V12 · x22 (99)

Figure 13: Domain of Attraction in state space

ẋ1 = f (x1 , x2 ) (100)

Check for stability by calculating the eigenvalues.

Figure 14: Switching Element with PT4

a) Calculate the describing function.

Now, the Fourier-coefficients of the fundamental wave can be calculated.

u(t) = A1 · cos(ωt) + B1 · sin(ωt) (115)

e = A · sin(ωt) is a sine wave signal without phase-shift, so it is point