EEP 3103

Modern Control Theory

M.Tech - 2017.S1

Module 2

Vinod V Nair
 Control System Design
Classic control design based on : 1. frequency response
2. root locus
Modern control system design is based on state variable methods.
In what follows we will primarily be looking at design by pole placement
( similar to root locus approach)
This design approach has two phases
1. design the system as if all states measured
2. design the state estimator
@LFC: Linear feedback control
 Regulator Systems
Consider the state equation with nth order state differential equation
ẋ(t) = Ax(t) + bu(t)
If we are able to measure all the n state variables at all times then we can
implement a linear control law like
u(t) = -k1x1(t) - k2x2(t)-..... = -knxn(t)
where k = [ k1,k2,...] is a constant state feedback gain matrix.
With this control law the system differential eqn is
ẋ(t) = (A –bk)x(t) with the characteristic eqn : |sI – (A-bk)| = 0 (1)
An nth order polynomial in s having the n gains k1...kn is the solution.
If the system is completely controllable, all eigenvalues of A-bk can be
arbitarily located in the complex plane by choosing k suitably. If all the
eigenvalues are placed in the left half s-plane the closed loop system is
asymptotically stable or in other words x(t) will decay to zero irrespective of
value of x(0).
Such systems are called regulator systems.and the origin of state space is the
equilibrium state of the system.
 Regulator Systems
A control configuration for a state regulator is given below and has no
command signals like servo systems. Selection of locations of the closed loop
poles is a design iterative process:
S = λ1, λ2.....
The desired characteristic eqn then is ,
( S- λ1 ) ( S- λ2 )... ( S- λn ). (2)
Using Eqs(1) and (2) and matching the coefficients we force k to have
restricted values.
A Design Example
A Design Example
A Design Example
A Design Example
A Design Example
 System with state feed back- STATE REGULATOR

r U x
+
+
-
B
+ ∫ C

K
State variable f.b
Constant gain matrix
.
X = AX + Bu
u = r − k1 x1 − k 2 x 2 ...... − k n x n = r − KX
K = [ k1 k 2 ..........k n ]
.
X = AX + B ( r − KX ) = ( A − BK ) X + Br
y = CX
Necessary and Sufficient Condition for Arbitrary
Pole Placement
• Necessary condition:If the system is not completely state controllable,
then there are eigenvalues of matrix A-BK that cannot be controlled by
state feedback.
• Sufficient condition : If the system is completely state controllable, all
eigenvalues can be arbitrarily placed by choosing matrix K according to

with transformation matrix

•
 Design
• Determination of closed loop poles to satisfy transient and
frequency response requirements
• By selecting appropriate values of gain K ,CL poles are placed
at desired locations.
• Requirements: original system is completely state controllable
all state variables are measurable and available
for feed back
Q c =  B A B A 2 B ....... A n − 1 B  Should have rank “n”
Determination of Matrix K Using Ackermann’s
Formula.

Since the Cayley–Hamilton theorem states that the matrix satisfies its own
characteristic equation, we have
 Determination of Matrix K Using Ackermann’s
Formula.
After some manipulations using the matrix identities we obtain

from which by premultiplying with the controllability matrix , we have

 Method I Determination of K
1. Determine the ch. Polynomial of original (1) and desired (2) system

n n−1 n−2
λI − A = λ + a1λ + a2λ +.........an−1λ + an (1)
n−1 n−2
(λ − µ1)(λ − µ2 ).......(λ − µn ) = λn +αλ
1 +α2λ +.... +αn−1λ +αn (2)
 P1 
P A 
 1 
2. Determine Transformation matrix Pc =  P1 A2  and P1 = [ 0 0 ......1 ] Q c − 1
 
. 
.P An −1 
 1 
3. K = [αn − an αn−1 − an−1.......α2 − a2 α1 − a1 ] Pc

If given system is in controllable canonical form

then Pc = I
 Method II

1. Determine ch. Polynomial with (a)state f.b and (b) desired c.l poles

λI − ( A− BK) = λI − A+ BK = λn + b1λn−1 + b2λn−2 +.... + bn−1λ + bn (1)

(λ − µ1)(λ − µ2 ).......(λ − µn ) = λn +α1λn−1 +α2λn−2 +.... +αn−1λ +αn (2)
b1 , b2 ......bn are functions of k 1, k 2 .....k n

2. Equate coefficients of (1) & (2) and solve for k 1, k 2 .....k n

b1 = α1, b2 = α2 ,.....bn−1 = αn−1, bn = αn

 Method III

1. Determine the desired ch. polynomial

(λ − µ1 )(λ − µ2 ).......(λ − µn ) = λ n + α1λ n −1 + α2λ n −2 + .... + αn−1λ + αn

2. Determine the matrix φ ( A) using the coefficients desired ch. polynomial

φ ( A ) = A n + α 1 A n −1 + α 2 A n − 2 + .... + α n −1 A + α n I
3. Calculate gain matrix K using Ackermann’s formula

K = [ 0 0.....0 1] Qc φ ( A) −1
 An Example
• Let us consider a plant given by
Method 1: The characteristic equation for the system is
Method 3: The third method is to use Ackermann’s formula.

and

We have
 Aspects of Pole Placement Design
• It is always possible to stabilize a completely controllable system by state
feedback or to improve its stability by assigning the closed loop poles to
locations in the left half s-plane.
• Although there is no restriction on selection of the real part of closed loop
poles from very large magnitude values for faster response such selection
will require large gains for increasing the rate of response to input signal
changes. Non-linearity may set in due to large values of signals / gains.
• The system gain matrix k is unique only for single input systems, as more
columns in B matrix will lead to multiple rows in K. This is an advantage in
design but correct selection of values becomes difficult.
Examples
Example contd...
Example contd...

-1
Example contd...
Example
 Example contd...

The system is completely controllable as rank of M is 2.

As the original form is not CCF ( matrix B is not [0 1]T ) transformation matrix
T is needed
Example contd...
 Limitations of Pole Placement & Requirement of
State Observers
• Pole placement assumed all state variables as available for
feedback.
• In practice it is not so and we need to estimate unavailable
state variables.
• One should not differentiate a state variable to generate
another as differentiation of a signal decreases the S-to-N ratio
• Estimation of unmeasurable state variables is commonly called
observation and a device or program that does this is called an
observer.
• If all state variables are observed in a system regardless of
availability it is a full order state observer.
• The state observer that observes only the minimum number of
state variables is called a minimum-order state observer or
minimum order observer.