Signal Processing and Linear Systems-B.P.Lathi copy

Rule 1 for this g shs n hence t here are three root

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

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

Unformatted text preview: s (s + 2) + 1)(8 + 10) t r S 0.5, (6.99) Let us further specify t hat t he s ystem meet t he following steady-state specifications: e r S 0.15 e . = 0, For this case, we a lready found e . we r equire er S 0.15. Therefore = 0, er = 8 /K a nd e p t~------..JI ' = 00 [see Eq. (6.98)]. B ut (a) c s plane => K 2: 53.34 (6.100) T urning t o Fig. 6.41, we n ote t hat t he poles o f T (s) lie in t he a cceptable region t o m eet t ransient specifications (25 < K < 64). Equation (6.100) shows t hat we must use K 2: 53.34 t o meet steady-state performance. Therefore to meet b oth t he transient a nd t he s teady-state specifications we m ust set t he gain in t he range 53.34 < K < 64. T he smallest steady-state error for a ramp i nput is obtained for K = 64. For this case, er 8 8 = - = - 4 = 0.125 K 6 T hus if t he s ystem is t o meet t he t ransient performance in Eq. (6.99), t he m inimum er = 0.125. We can do no better. In case we a re required t o have er < 0.125 -p ( b) - C( F ig. 6 .45 A lead compensator. while mainta~ning t he s ame transient performance, we will have t o use some kind o f compensatIOn. 6 .7-5 Compensation . T he synthesis problem for t he position control system I·n FI·g . 6.36a I.S a very I I s~mp e ex~p e where t he t ransient a nd s teady-state specifications could be met by Simple adJu.stme~t of gain K . I n many cases, i t may be impossible t o meet b oth sets o f specificatIOn (transi~nt a nd s teady s tate) by simple adjustment of the gain K . "V-!e m ay ~e able t o satisfy one set o f specifications o r t he o ther b ut n ot b oth ConSider a gam t he s ystem in Fig. 6.36a, with t he following specifications: . PO ~ - 0.15 < K y (l) K G(s) K p = K /5 a nd K v = K a = O. Hence, e . = 5 /(5 + K ) a nd e r = e p = 0 0. Such s ystems are designated as t ype 0 systems. These systems have finite e ., b ut infinite e r a nd e p • T hese s ystems may be acceptable for s tep i nputs (position control), b ut n ot for r amp or p arabolic i nputs (tracking velocity or acceleration). I f G(s) has t wo poles a t t he origin, t he s ystem is designated as t ype 2 system. In this case K p = K v = 0 0, a nd K a = finite. Hence, e . = e r = 0 a nd e p is finite. In general, i f G (s) has q poles a t t he origin, it is a t ype q system. Clearly, for a unity feedback system, increasing t he n umber of poles a t t he origin in G(s) improves t he s teady-state performance. However, this procedure increases n and reduces t he m agnitude of u , t he c entroid of t he r oot locus asymptotes. This shifts t he r oot locus t owards t he j w-axis with consequent deterioration in t he t ransient performance a nd t he system stability. I t should be remembered t hat t he r esults in Eqs. (6.96) and (6.97) apply only t o u nity feedback systems (Fig. 6.44). Steady-state error specifications in this case are t ranslated in terms of constraints on t he open-loop transfer function K G(s). In contrast, t he r esults in Eqs. (6.92) t hrough (6.95) apply...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/14/2013 for the course ENG 350 taught by Professor Bayliss during the Spring '13 term at Northwestern.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online