topic14 - Topic #14 16.31 Feedback Control Systems...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Topic #14 16.31 Feedback Control Systems State-Space Systems Full-state Feedback Control How do we change the poles of the state-space system? Or, even if we can change the pole locations. Where do we put the poles? Heuristics Linear Quadratic Regulator How well does this approach work? Cite as: Jonathan How, course materials for 16.31 Feedback Control Systems, Fall 2007. MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu), Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Downloaded on [DD Month YYYY]. Fall 2007 16.31 141 Pole Placement Approach So far we have looked at how to pick K to get the dynamics to have some nice properties ( i.e. stabilize A ) i ( A ) i ( A BK ) Classic Question: where should we put these closed-loop poles? Approach #1: use time-domain specifications to locate domi- nant poles roots of: s 2 + 2 n s + 2 n = 0 Then place rest of the poles so they are much faster than the dominant behavior. Example: could keep the same damped frequency w d and then move the real part to be 23 times faster than real part of dominant poles n Just be careful moving the poles too far to the left because it takes a lot of control effort Rules of thumb for 2nd order response: 10-90% rise time t r = 1 + 1 . 1 + 1 . 4 2 n Settling time (5%) t s = 3 n Time to peak amplitude t p = n 1 2 Peak overshoot M p = e n t p October 20, 2007 Cite as: Jonathan How, course materials for 16.31 Feedback Control Systems, Fall 2007. MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu), Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Downloaded on [DD Month YYYY]. Fall 2007 16.31 142 Approach #2: Could also choose closed-loop poles to mimic a system that has performance similar to what you want Just set pole locations equal to those of the prototype system. Various options exist Bessel Polynomial Systems of order k G p ( s ) = 1 B k ( s ) Figure 1: Bessel root locations. All scaled to give settling times of 1 second, which you can change to t s by dividing the poles by t s . October 20, 2007 k = 1 2 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Time (sec) Step response of G p for various k Step response G 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 10 Pole locations of B 1 ( s ) k-4.6200-4.0530 j 2.3400 -5.0093, - 3.9668 j 3.7845 -4.0156 j 5.0723, - 5.5281 j 1.6553 -6.4480, - 4.1104 j 6.3142 - 5.9268 j 3.0813 -4.2169 j 7.5300, - 6.2613 j 4.4018, - 7.1205 j 1.4540 -8.0271, - 4.3361 j 8.7519, - 6.5714 j 5.6786, - 7.6824 j 2.8081 -4.4554 j 9.9715, - 6.8554 j 6.9278, - 8.1682 j 4.1057, - 8.7693 j 1.3616 9.6585, - 4.5696 j 11.1838, - 7.1145 j 8.1557, - 8.5962 j 5.3655, - 9.4013 j 2.6655 j 1.3071 -4.6835 j- 12.4022, - 7.3609 j 9.3777, - 8.9898 j 6.6057, - 9.9657 j 3.9342, - 10.4278 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Roots of normalized bessel polynomials corresponding to a settling time of 1 second Figure by MIT OpenCourseWare....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 11/07/2011 for the course AERO 16.31 taught by Professor Jonathanhow during the Fall '07 term at MIT.

Page1 / 16

topic14 - Topic #14 16.31 Feedback Control Systems...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online